Section 8A

The Latest 400 or so Topics

Moderators: Mitch Hawker, east hockey, karl(east)

warriors41
Posts: 654
Joined: Sat Mar 01, 2008 1:40 pm

Post by warriors41 » Mon Feb 25, 2013 12:33 am

Best of luck to Warroad and EGF as they play in the section final. I have read online that WDAZ is actually going to broadcast the game live for those of you who don't think you will be able to make in person. This is a fantastic idea, although it will hardly replace the in house atmosphere. If both teams play like they did in the semi's, who knows who will win. If both teams play to the best of their ability, it will probably be EGF representing section 8.

hawkhockey
Posts: 240
Joined: Sat Nov 29, 2008 11:53 pm

Post by hawkhockey » Mon Feb 25, 2013 12:56 am

Prowlerhockey wrote:
hawkhockey wrote:
Prowlerhockey wrote:
bardown27 wrote:Prowlerhockey,

by no means was it a cheap or dirty hit. it was a 2 on 2 coming into the zone, and the weak side D, LIKE THEY ARE TAUGHT, crossed with the strong side D and played the body. They teach this is peewees (when checking was still legal in peewees). it was shoulder to chest, not elbow to head or whatever your eyes saw. clean hit, very nice step up by Mr. Nelson.
clearly we were watching a different game then one another, and it was shoulder to HEAD not chest I was right at ice level I seen the whole play, not saying it was illegal hit at all, I'm saying that that was his intent to hurt him and take him out of the game! Hope he gets what's coming to him against east grand forks!
when you say it was a hit to the head you are insisting that it was illegal as that would be head contact. How do you know his intentions. And you just wished an injury on a high school student. Congratulations.
shouldn't you be talking about hermantown somewhere on a different post???
There are more hawks than Hermantown. you wished harm upon a high school child. I just wanted you to realize that.

Prowlerhockey
Posts: 211
Joined: Wed Feb 08, 2012 3:59 pm

Post by Prowlerhockey » Mon Feb 25, 2013 1:09 am

hawkhockey wrote:
Prowlerhockey wrote:
hawkhockey wrote:
Prowlerhockey wrote:
bardown27 wrote:Prowlerhockey,

by no means was it a cheap or dirty hit. it was a 2 on 2 coming into the zone, and the weak side D, LIKE THEY ARE TAUGHT, crossed with the strong side D and played the body. They teach this is peewees (when checking was still legal in peewees). it was shoulder to chest, not elbow to head or whatever your eyes saw. clean hit, very nice step up by Mr. Nelson.
clearly we were watching a different game then one another, and it was shoulder to HEAD not chest I was right at ice level I seen the whole play, not saying it was illegal hit at all, I'm saying that that was his intent to hurt him and take him out of the game! Hope he gets what's coming to him against east grand forks!
when you say it was a hit to the head you are insisting that it was illegal as that would be head contact. How do you know his intentions. And you just wished an injury on a high school student. Congratulations.
shouldn't you be talking about hermantown somewhere on a different post???
There are more hawks than Hermantown. you wished harm upon a high school child. I just wanted you to realize that.
do to others as you would want done to yourself. And also I would never wish harm on anyone, I'm not that cold hearted, I was trying to state that maybe he will have a target on him because of that hit he made and it might make him think twice next time he decides to do that. I guess I worded it wrong. Sorry

warriors41
Posts: 654
Joined: Sat Mar 01, 2008 1:40 pm

Post by warriors41 » Mon Feb 25, 2013 1:24 am

Prowlerhockey wrote:
hawkhockey wrote:
Prowlerhockey wrote:
hawkhockey wrote:
Prowlerhockey wrote:
bardown27 wrote:Prowlerhockey,

by no means was it a cheap or dirty hit. it was a 2 on 2 coming into the zone, and the weak side D, LIKE THEY ARE TAUGHT, crossed with the strong side D and played the body. They teach this is peewees (when checking was still legal in peewees). it was shoulder to chest, not elbow to head or whatever your eyes saw. clean hit, very nice step up by Mr. Nelson.
clearly we were watching a different game then one another, and it was shoulder to HEAD not chest I was right at ice level I seen the whole play, not saying it was illegal hit at all, I'm saying that that was his intent to hurt him and take him out of the game! Hope he gets what's coming to him against east grand forks!
when you say it was a hit to the head you are insisting that it was illegal as that would be head contact. How do you know his intentions. And you just wished an injury on a high school student. Congratulations.
shouldn't you be talking about hermantown somewhere on a different post???
There are more hawks than Hermantown. you wished harm upon a high school child. I just wanted you to realize that.
do to others as you would want done to yourself. And also I would never wish harm on anyone, I'm not that cold hearted, I was trying to state that maybe he will have a target on him because of that hit he made and it might make him think twice next time he decides to do that. I guess I worded it wrong. Sorry
You said you "hope" he gets "what is coming to him." I know I can't read your mind, but by you have just shown more intent for someone to get hurt than Nelson did.

Prowlerhockey
Posts: 211
Joined: Wed Feb 08, 2012 3:59 pm

Post by Prowlerhockey » Mon Feb 25, 2013 1:39 am

warriors41 wrote:
Prowlerhockey wrote:
hawkhockey wrote:
Prowlerhockey wrote:
hawkhockey wrote:
Prowlerhockey wrote:
bardown27 wrote:Prowlerhockey,

by no means was it a cheap or dirty hit. it was a 2 on 2 coming into the zone, and the weak side D, LIKE THEY ARE TAUGHT, crossed with the strong side D and played the body. They teach this is peewees (when checking was still legal in peewees). it was shoulder to chest, not elbow to head or whatever your eyes saw. clean hit, very nice step up by Mr. Nelson.
clearly we were watching a different game then one another, and it was shoulder to HEAD not chest I was right at ice level I seen the whole play, not saying it was illegal hit at all, I'm saying that that was his intent to hurt him and take him out of the game! Hope he gets what's coming to him against east grand forks!

when you say it was a hit to the head you are insisting that it was illegal as that would be head contact. How do you know his intentions. And you just wished an injury on a high school student. Congratulations.
shouldn't you be talking about hermantown somewhere on a different post???
There are more hawks than Hermantown. you wished harm upon a high school child. I just wanted you to realize that.
do to others as you would want done to yourself. And also I would never wish harm on anyone, I'm not that cold hearted, I was trying to state that maybe he will have a target on him because of that hit he made and it might make him think twice next time he decides to do that. I guess I worded it wrong. Sorry
You said you "hope" he gets "what is coming to him." I know I can't read your mind, but by you have just shown more intent for someone to get hurt than Nelson did.
so where in that statement is there anything about me wanting someone getting hurt? Like I said in my last post, I worded my statement wrong! I know you cant read my mind so read this,I WOULD NEVER WISH HARM ON ANYONE! Is that clear enough for you to read??

PuckSwami
Posts: 31
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2013 10:23 am

Post by PuckSwami » Mon Feb 25, 2013 8:25 am

The hit on Engelstad was a clean, but hard hit. I was looking right at it when it happened and I have watched it several times on WDAZ, clean. Concussions don't have to happen because a head hits the ice or other hard object, they can happen from a sudden stop. Take a concussion training course like all coaches in Minnesota are required to do and you will learn more about concussions, I have. Maybe it was when he hit the ice, maybe it was the impact of the hit. Glad to hear it was only a concussion and he will be fine.

Yes, Nelson was looking to make the hit and the target happened to be Engelstad but that was coincidence, Warroad was not "targeting" him, it could have been any TRF player in that situation and it would have been the same.

Now, what about the TRF player running the Warroad goalie, the TRF goalie blatantly elbowing Warroad's Roth, who was being checked into the crease, in the last 5 minutes and then arguing with the official nearly all the way to the scorers table to report it trying to say it was a shoulder. Also TRF's #10's antics the rest of the game after the Engelstad hit or TRF's #8's work trying to bait Warroad players into taking a penalty late so TRF could have a power play chance. I like how Warroad maintained their composure and didn't get sucked into anything.

Did the hit on Engelstad change this game, yes, BUT TRF had 2.5 periods to make adjustments and win this game but they did not. It was not like there was some insurmountable Warroad lead TRF had to overcome, the hit happened with about 7 minutes left in the first period and NOBODY scored until Warroad did with 4:55 left in the third.

Good Luck to both teams playing on Thursday!

moose jaw
Posts: 118
Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 8:09 am
Location: Prairie province

Post by moose jaw » Mon Feb 25, 2013 9:14 am

Unfortunate that someone was injured here but it was a clean hard hit,if you play a warroad team especially in the playoffs you best ha e your head on a swivel and not get caught like this.warroads style of play although it has maybe been missing the last couple of years is to play physical and attempt to intimidate,they mastered in under eades and I believe the current head coach is a eades disciple,at times have they crossed the line?yes but this was a clean hit and to call the kid the attacker is ridiculous.you might not like that style of play and that's fine but to say the kid had intent to injure or was the attacker c'mon.theres nothing wrong with clean physical play something thief sorely lacked this season

DekeDangler
Posts: 50
Joined: Thu Jan 03, 2013 10:31 am

Post by DekeDangler » Mon Feb 25, 2013 11:48 am

[quote="moose jaw"]Unfortunate that someone was injured here but it was a clean hard hit,if you play a warroad team especially in the playoffs you best ha e your head on a swivel and not get caught like this.warroads style of play although it has maybe been missing the last couple of years is to play physical and attempt to intimidate,they mastered in under eades and I believe the current head coach is a eades disciple,at times have they crossed the line?yes but this was a clean hit and to call the kid the attacker is ridiculous.you might not like that style of play and that's fine but to say the kid had intent to injure or was the attacker c'mon.theres nothing wrong with clean physical play something thief sorely lacked this season[/quote]

Get a grip! Are you serious? You better "not get caught like this"? That's ridiculous. So kids are justified in laying someone out that's not ready for a crushing hit? It was mentioned earlier about responsibilities of players to know when to back down or ease off in order to protect other players. I totally agree. Have you been on the other end of your kid getting destroyed and not say anything? Of course not! Hey, it's just part of the game, right?

As far as mastering anything under Eades, it was how to be a goon. His glory days at UND are all over Youtube of how he stormed the opposing teams(Wisconsin) bench and continued down the hallway towards the locker rooms. His mentality and style was suited for a higher level of play. Not young impressionable minds that need more than just skating, passing, shooting and hitting.

"Attacker"? Don't we generally call any player the "attacker" that is pursuing another player or puck?

Mailman
Posts: 206
Joined: Sun Jul 20, 2008 12:08 pm

Post by Mailman » Mon Feb 25, 2013 12:06 pm

PuckSwami wrote:The hit on Engelstad was a clean, but hard hit. I was looking right at it when it happened and I have watched it several times on WDAZ, clean. Concussions don't have to happen because a head hits the ice or other hard object, they can happen from a sudden stop. Take a concussion training course like all coaches in Minnesota are required to do and you will learn more about concussions, I have. Maybe it was when he hit the ice, maybe it was the impact of the hit. Glad to hear it was only a concussion and he will be fine.

Yes, Nelson was looking to make the hit and the target happened to be Engelstad but that was coincidence, Warroad was not "targeting" him, it could have been any TRF player in that situation and it would have been the same.

Now, what about the TRF player running the Warroad goalie, the TRF goalie blatantly elbowing Warroad's Roth, who was being checked into the crease, in the last 5 minutes and then arguing with the official nearly all the way to the scorers table to report it trying to say it was a shoulder. Also TRF's #10's antics the rest of the game after the Engelstad hit or TRF's #8's work trying to bait Warroad players into taking a penalty late so TRF could have a power play chance. I like how Warroad maintained their composure and didn't get sucked into anything.

Did the hit on Engelstad change this game, yes, BUT TRF had 2.5 periods to make adjustments and win this game but they did not. It was not like there was some insurmountable Warroad lead TRF had to overcome, the hit happened with about 7 minutes left in the first period and NOBODY scored until Warroad did with 4:55 left in the third.

Good Luck to both teams playing on Thursday!
Do you have a link to the video ?

moose jaw
Posts: 118
Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 8:09 am
Location: Prairie province

Post by moose jaw » Mon Feb 25, 2013 1:01 pm

maybe i will go slower for you danglie,no one wants to see any young athelete get injured but there is an inherant risk to playing a contact sport and unfortunatly kids do get injured,last i knew checking in hockey is legal and from my vantage point it was a clean hit
as far as eades goes you can whine about it all you want and i might agree with you on a couple of things concerning him but one thing you cant argue he has been successfull wherever hes been.Now once again so you understand 1.injured athelete very regretable.2 clean hit and from might point of view a tough nosed play it wasnt from behind and if the young man picks his head up maybe hes the one that delivers the hit.

warriors41
Posts: 654
Joined: Sat Mar 01, 2008 1:40 pm

Post by warriors41 » Mon Feb 25, 2013 1:19 pm

No athlete playing a contact sport should rely on the the other team to help protect them and keep them out of dangerous situations. If they dont care to protect themselves its not someone else's fault. We aren't talking about a check from behind or a boarding incident.

readandreact
Posts: 4
Joined: Thu Dec 13, 2012 1:36 pm

Post by readandreact » Mon Feb 25, 2013 1:46 pm

prowlerhockey seems to think he was the only one who watched the hit closely enough to see head contact. I sure am glad he is such a hockey expert or we would all be screwed here. Good job buddy.

DekeDangler
Posts: 50
Joined: Thu Jan 03, 2013 10:31 am

Post by DekeDangler » Mon Feb 25, 2013 2:45 pm

Wow, Warriors41 and moose jaw, you two must be brothers. You can slow it down all you want......but you're still speaking nonsense. If you truly believe that it's every players responsibility to keep there head up and always be prepared for every hit, you are insinuating that they have what's coming to them if someone is lining them up. This is not a realistic expectation. Players are vulnerable at many different points during a game. We teach to not hit a player from behind because they are vulnerable, in order to protect them. We teach not to board because of the devastating injuries, in order to protect them. Coaches do teach restraint and to hold back on other players that are in vulnerable positions, in order to protect them. This is done out of respect for the player and the game. Not every player is going to have their head up. We see players, on a continual basis, demonstrate restraint and good judgment when they notice a player with their head down. It is clearly obvious that you two missed that lesson or just don't care.

Prowlerhockey
Posts: 211
Joined: Wed Feb 08, 2012 3:59 pm

Post by Prowlerhockey » Mon Feb 25, 2013 2:45 pm

readandreact wrote:prowlerhockey seems to think he was the only one who watched the hit closely enough to see head contact. I sure am glad he is such a hockey expert or we would all be screwed here. Good job buddy.
your welcome, anytime!! And who was talking to you??

moose jaw
Posts: 118
Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 8:09 am
Location: Prairie province

Post by moose jaw » Mon Feb 25, 2013 3:08 pm

you can keep trying to insinuate that somebody here said he deserved what happened not one person on this board has,you keep wanting to make this into the same thing as hit from behind or a boarding,knock it off,if he wasn't carrying the puck up ice and was blindsided by charge then I would agree but that was not the case hear,you are taught to skate with your head up,your taught how to give a check and how to protect yourself even more importantly now as everyone who plays is getting stronger and faster with all the off season training that goes on unfortunately there's a risk to that and that is something people do need to think about before putting there kids in a contact sport.ie football.danglie if you want to take checking out of the boys side and have them play danglies no contact hockey then by all means head up a rule change.

hawkhockey
Posts: 240
Joined: Sat Nov 29, 2008 11:53 pm

Post by hawkhockey » Mon Feb 25, 2013 3:15 pm

Prowlerhockey wrote:
readandreact wrote:prowlerhockey seems to think he was the only one who watched the hit closely enough to see head contact. I sure am glad he is such a hockey expert or we would all be screwed here. Good job buddy.
your welcome, anytime!! And who was talking to you??
you posted on a public message board. you were talking to everyone. relax captain defensive

DekeDangler
Posts: 50
Joined: Thu Jan 03, 2013 10:31 am

Post by DekeDangler » Mon Feb 25, 2013 3:53 pm

[quote="moose jaw"]you can keep trying to insinuate that somebody here said he deserved what happened not one person on this board has,you keep wanting to make this into the same thing as hit from behind or a boarding,knock it off,if he wasn't carrying the puck up ice and was blindsided by charge then I would agree but that was not the case hear,you are taught to skate with your head up,your taught how to give a check and how to protect yourself even more importantly now as everyone who plays is getting stronger and faster with all the off season training that goes on unfortunately there's a risk to that and that is something people do need to think about before putting there kids in a contact sport.ie football.danglie if you want to take checking out of the boys side and have them play danglies no contact hockey then by all means head up a rule change.[/quote]

Okay jawjacker, you're so busy flapping your gums that you're missing the point. Get control of your emotions and focus on the main point here. I never said anything about a cheapshot, a check from behind or a blindside. Let me slow it down for you and simplify it in a way that you can understand. Players are not protected at all times, wether it is there fault or not. ie, heads up or heads down. Other players are aware of this. If you ever played hockey you were aware of this too. If you have never played before, then you have no background or knowledge to speak in this matter. It is the attackers(once again, the player persuing the other player or puck) descretion on how much force they will use when the time calls for it. Here is your $64,000 question. Should a player hit another player(with his head down) with the same intensity that he would if the other players head was up? Simply put, this is the point.

moose jaw
Posts: 118
Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 8:09 am
Location: Prairie province

Post by moose jaw » Mon Feb 25, 2013 4:14 pm

If he's cutting to the net with the puck Absolutely!clear enough for you,not sure what candy --- league you played in.

DekeDangler
Posts: 50
Joined: Thu Jan 03, 2013 10:31 am

Post by DekeDangler » Mon Feb 25, 2013 4:36 pm

[quote="moose jaw"]If he's cutting to the net with the puck Absolutely!clear enough for you,not sure what candy --- league you played in.[/quote]

Thank you. Your response speaks volumes about you as an individual. I can see that we are waisting our time on you, being that you have clearly identified yourself as being from the Goon league. No respectable, well coached player will make a hit of that intensity. No experienced, respectable and moral coach will let such a hit happen without adressing it and make it a teaching moment.

Crimson Live
Posts: 17
Joined: Thu Dec 13, 2012 1:38 am

Post by Crimson Live » Mon Feb 25, 2013 4:51 pm

DekeDangler

If you played hockey you should know that in the playoffs momentum is huge. A big hit can change momentum by getting your players and fans pumped up. So I believe that was Nelson's intentions, and the actual results were quite unfortunate.

Now to your point of who's responsibility it is to protect the players. In situations such as checking from behind or boarding, yes, it is the defenders responsibility to make sure that the hit is legal. In this case I do not think it was the defenders obligation to make sure the boy with the puck is ready for the hit. In such a high paced game how can you make sure that A. it is a clean and legal hit (which it was) and B. make sure the kid has his head up in a matter of half of a second. What you are suggesting seems quite irrational. It is the job of the person with the puck to make sure they do not put themselves in a position such as cutting through the slot with your head down, where they could be subjected to a hit.

Clean and legal hit by Nelson. It is too bad Englestad was injured the way he was but maybe in the future it will benefit him and make him more aware of the situations he is putting himself in.

blackwarrior
Posts: 15
Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2012 1:35 pm

Post by blackwarrior » Mon Feb 25, 2013 5:01 pm

All I can say is that PROWLER HOCKEY is the biggest cry baby on this site TRF lost fair and square!! And Warroad didn't target englested, he just needs to learn that this isn't squirt hockey, where u can cut across the middle without getting touched.

moose jaw
Posts: 118
Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 8:09 am
Location: Prairie province

Post by moose jaw » Mon Feb 25, 2013 5:23 pm

where can i send my donation to start up dekesys you have all the room to dangle because we dont check creampuff league.let me guess56701 :wink:

trippedontheblueline
Posts: 2
Joined: Wed Dec 21, 2011 6:57 am

Post by trippedontheblueline » Mon Feb 25, 2013 5:27 pm

I think Warroad is getting a bit defensive at the moment and some who hate Thief. Nelsons arm is up high and follows through on Englestads head neck area. I have seen the video on the news website. Questionable non/call - just my viewpoint - nothing to gain or lose. I say contact to the head.

Mailman
Posts: 206
Joined: Sun Jul 20, 2008 12:08 pm

Post by Mailman » Mon Feb 25, 2013 5:44 pm

trippedontheblueline wrote:I think Warroad is getting a bit defensive at the moment and some who hate Thief. Nelsons arm is up high and follows through on Englestads head neck area. I have seen the video on the news website. Questionable non/call - just my viewpoint - nothing to gain or lose. I say contact to the head.
Do you have a link to the video ?

groundpoundinggrunt
Posts: 13
Joined: Sat Feb 23, 2013 10:58 am

Post by groundpoundinggrunt » Mon Feb 25, 2013 6:05 pm

Now I wish I really would have stayed for the game rather than have to be the after game taxi service. Mailman, I saw the video too and it's so hard to see a really evident head shot. The Warroad player just gave a really hard check. It looks like the follow through, that raises the question. There appears to be unintentional head contact because of the follow through of the check. The video was on WDAY Channel 6 out of Fargo. I'm sure it's been replaced already with last nights 10:00 news. Interesting points about heads-up/heads-down checks. Both sides have valid points. It's disappointing that the "emotions" get so involved and these conversations turn ugly. I think there could be some really good discussions about this if both sides could remain civil.

Post Reply