Accountability
by PPP on Mar 10, 2009 11:00 AM EDT
in Negative Nancy Notebook
Email
Print
Bruce Garrioch watches the game wtih Hillary Duff
I find it ridiculous that an idiot like James Duthie will imagine that he has the right to dismiss bloggers as rumour-mongerers that live in their parents' basement when he hosts segments that do nothing but monger rumours. Blogger v. journalist arguments shouldn't exist. Not because we fill different roles (mostly we don't since most hockey coverage features very little reporting) but because it makes 'journalists' look like tools. And hypocrites. And douchebags. They make up rumours (see Dominic Moore to Chicago) and we can make up rumours (see James Duthie wears Depends).
Exhibit A: Bruce "Malkin to the Kings" Garrioch
There was much grousing here in Ottawa, particularly amongst the media, that Wilson had scuttled the best subplot to a late-season game between non-playoff teams.
Paul Hunter is a good man. He does not point out that the main member of the ottawa media that was upset was Bruce "Malkin to the Kings" Garrioch. Why was he so upset? Because not being able to file a paint-by-numbers article about Gerber's return to ottawa meant that he had to take time out of his senators-sponsored individual hot dog eating contest.
Wilson certainly did a good job making himself the centre of attention. He opted not to start former Senators goalie Martin Gerber and decided to go with veteran Curtis Joseph instead. That backfired as well.
Just kidding. Of course he didn't watch the game. Looks like he decided that he was going to stick with his pre-game hissy fit. Looks like he is trying his darndest to make himself the centre of attention. Some might say that he's projecting. I don't know that starting CuJo backfired. If not for two ridiculous fluke shots he would have shut out the toothless senators.
All this talk of Bruce "Malkin to the Kings" Garrioch reminds me of one of DGB's earlier posts about the Mark Bell Hit of Glory:
Clearly, that must be Garrioch's point. If the roles were reversed, I'm sure he'd be just as critical. If (in a purely hypothetical scenario) a Senators tough guy laid out an opposing teams star player on a virtually identical hit, Garrioch would be first in line to condemn him too, right?
Spoiler alert: Of course he doesn't. And it's epidemic in ottawa as Allen Panzeri (I'll spare you the Mike Milbury-esque joke) chimes in with his own fake outrage and is also skewered:
Meanwhile, just in case anyone thinks this is limited to Garrioch or to the Sun, here's the Ottawa Citizen's Allen Panzeri. Watch as he tries to out-Garrioch Garrioch by going into full-on hysterics over the Bell hit.
I've looked for the articles where Panzeri is equally outraged by the Neil hit, but haven't been able to find a single one. Weird. Must be some sort of Google database error.
So what did Panzeri have to say about last night's game:
The Ottawa Senators hadn’t had much luck against the Toronto Maple Leafs this season, winning just once in four games.
That's true. The Leafs are also 7-2-1 in their last 10 against the senators.
In any game against the Maple Leafs in Ottawa, Alfredsson plays the dual role of hero and villain, jeered by Toronto fans for his past grievances, real or imagined, and cheered by Ottawa fans.
Dear God. Is it that hard to admit that a player has committed a wrong? Is this really an imagined grievance? Or is it a filthy fucking hit? We'll never know until it happens to a senator. Argue whether it makes sense to keep booing him after seeing Bell leave Krusty with jelly legs but don't pretend that there was nothing wrong with it. It would be like seeing Leaf fans defend Domi's elbow to Niedermayer's head. Patently ridiculous. It's an epidemic with them:
"Real dangerous, I guess," said an annoyed Spezza sarcastically. "They told me (the blade) was too skinny. I shave them down to be skinnier."
HE KNOWS HE DID SOMETHING WRONG! LOOK AT HIM TRY TO BREAK HIS STICK AND TRY TO HIDE IT! How hard is it to accept that you did something wrong? Maybe it's because of the culture of getting away with murder that pervades in ottawa as the media give the players a free pass on any (sniff)thing (sniff) that they (sniff) do. Hell, PeterR has been driven to the "everyone's doing it" defence:
On the Team 1200 Senators' post-game show, analyst Mike Eastwood hypothesised that at least one player on each NHL team is likely playing with an "illegal" stick, particulary the better players. If that's the case, then the league needs to make a decision: Change the regulations, or mandate stick-checks before every game. A penalty is only as strong as the degree to which it's enforced, and there's no sense looking past a player's infraction 99 per cent of the time, until they're called on it.
Look, lots of people do a lot of illegal things but if we all had that attitude it would be chaos. If coaches are not calling players on using illegal sticks it may be because they are waiting for the right time to spring their trap but it is still breaking a rule. They sound like Sabres fans that are still whining about the puck over the glass delay of game penalty from 2006. EVERYONE KNOWS THE RULE!
Something that's come up is why the league even has these rules.
That is the stance of Giggles and Sens Army (BWAHAHAHA they didn't even sell out last night) and it makes perfect sense. Since they've never lost a player to an eye injury and don't give a shit that one of their player's carelessness with his stick cost a player a promising career it might not have crossed their simplistic minds why that rule might be necessary:
- Measure your eye socket from top to bottom.
- Measure your eye socket from right to left.
- Report your findings.
Now, my eye might not be regulation sized but a 2" wide blade would not fit in my eye socket. Try it for yourself and tell me what you find. Don't worry about the weird looks from your co-workers. Just tell them that you are proving that you are smarter than an entire fanbase.
Last Minute Update of a Reasonable Link That Did Not Lend Itself to Mocking:
Puck Daddy wants to see the rule enforced all of the time rather than on a coach's whim. I disagree that it's against the 'code' to call players out on cheating. Also, he misses the revelation about why the rule might be needed.
59 comments
|
6 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Thumbs up
and recc’ed
"God's in His heaven. All's right with the world." - Robert Browning (1812-1889)
Also
why was Hilary Duff there? With Garroich?
"God's in His heaven. All's right with the world." - Robert Browning (1812-1889)
haha
I’m kidding. That’s probably her body guard but he could also star as Garrioch in the TV Special on his life as a jock-sniffing stalker.
Pension Plan Puppets: A Toronto Maple Leafs blog and a group therapy session.
Nicely done PPP
I’m glad you pointed out Spezza’s whiny comments. Is he really that retarded that he doesn’t see how a shaved down stick could actually injure someone, even after being witness to Bryan Berrard bleeding all over the ice? Wait, never mind. I answered my own question.
"So hide your passions in between the daily grind and broken dreams. The city is a drag."
Hillary Duff and Carrie Underwood
Giggity
A Toronto sports blog, where we unequivocally and unapologetically support the home team...
PLAYOFFS!!!!1
Actually...
Had you not pulled a Bruce “Malkin to the Kings” Garrioch-type move and taken my words out of the context in which they were presented, you would see that I posed a question: If this is a regulation based on safety concerns, then the rule should be regulated all the time, rather than simply on challenges.
However, if it’s a regulation based on the old banana blades of yore, then the rules need to be re-addressed because the league is trying to promote scoring, rather than prevent it.
And I didn’t defend the illegal stick Spezza was using. I merely said that if so many people are using illegal sticks, then the league needs to do one of two things: Change the rule, or enforce it. Because right now, it’s an archaic system based on challenges that, in the long run, doesn’t serve its supposed purpose of protecting players.
by Peter Raaymakers on Mar 10, 2009 11:25 AM EDT reply actions
If this is a regulation based on safety concerns, then the rule should be regulated all the time, rather than simply on challenges.
I can agree with that but then I’m not sure it can be done practically. The officials will have to measure every stick on the bench before puck drop at the start of each period and someone would have to be present on each bench during the game to make sure the equipment guys don’t swap out sticks during play when no one’s watching. It would be a logistical nightmare not to mention the delay to the game it would entail.
"God's in His heaven. All's right with the world." - Robert Browning (1812-1889)
It's totally feasible.
Have management accountable, and—if this is deemed to be in the interests of the players’ safety—increase the penalties for infractions. If the league makes it clear that this is a more greivous infraction, then players would take it more seriously. When it gets called once in ten years, and the penalty’s got no teeth, who’s going to take it seriously? Apparently not Jason Spezza, nor so many other players in the league who have illegal sticks.
by Peter Raaymakers on Mar 10, 2009 11:41 AM EDT up reply actions
Yeah
The fine is ridiculous. It should be a suspension. Those players are making conscious efforts to endanger other players.
Winkle has a good point of how tough it would be to have the sticks checked every period and to have someone standing guard over them during the game but I guess Dave Keon Jr. can’t be the scorer at the ACC for his entire life.
Pension Plan Puppets: A Toronto Maple Leafs blog and a group therapy session.
players safety....?
you can’t get them to wear visors for their own good, and you think they’ll change this for their own good.
Truth of the matter is that any player that does this is as good as someone on PED’s. Chances are, the player thinks they need the extra advantage and it becomes a mental block more than anything. “Without the smaller blade, my skills deteriorate.” or “wearing a visor impedes my vision too greatly and impedes my ability to score/pass/whatever.”
These are grown men, being paid millions of dollars to provide entertainment. It’s not out of the realm of possibility that they are looking for any edge they can find to continue their careers and big paydays. Taking away the responsibility for their own actions is shirking the problem and shifting the blame.
The truth is, Spezza cheated and he got caught. You want to argue semantics over that, go nuts. Doesn’t change what happened. The real question to me is why it was done by him in the first place? That’s a confidence issue more than anything.
"We’re looking forward to building the type of team the Rangers are able to buy."
The Left Coast Lock
by blurr1974 on Mar 10, 2009 11:47 AM EDT up reply actions
But Blurr, this issue is different than PED’s. PED’s may/may not endanger your own health, but they don’t directly menace the well-being of other (non-consenting) individuals. Spezza’s choice to play with a spear rather than a hockey stick may be made for any of a variety of reasons, but that choice should be actively discouraged by not only the league, but also his team-mates because it is not right for him to be carrying around a stick that for all intents and purposes has a fucking point on the end of the blade.
It’s one thing if they don’t want to wear a helmet to protect themselves; it’s quite another if they insist on cheating in ways that endanger their opponent. Rather than having a discussion about whether Wilson broke some “code” in calling for the measurement, the Senators should be suspending Spezza for his indiscretion and making it clear to their other players that such activity will not be tolerated. The teams and the players have to take responsibility for their own behaviour; to have some honour, respect and commitment to competing fairly and intensely – but safely.
jrwendelman
The Artist Formerly Known as "Junior", who blogs at heroesinrehab.ca/blog
"But if someone so eager to engage into fist talk, we can always meet after season end in Minsk." (Mikhail Grabovski and a well-meaning but not particularly skillful translator)
by jrwendelman on Mar 10, 2009 11:59 AM EDT up reply actions
it's the mental aspect of PED's i'm referencing...
kind of like a physical placebo if you will…
Player X has always shaved his stick more than current rules allow and not been caught. He’s caught, now has to play with regulation blade size, and his game is off, because in his head, the reason for his success at the NHL level was due to an advantage with his stick.
make more sense?
"We’re looking forward to building the type of team the Rangers are able to buy."
The Left Coast Lock
by blurr1974 on Mar 10, 2009 12:01 PM EDT up reply actions
Gotcha.
jrwendelman
The Artist Formerly Known as "Junior", who blogs at heroesinrehab.ca/blog
"But if someone so eager to engage into fist talk, we can always meet after season end in Minsk." (Mikhail Grabovski and a well-meaning but not particularly skillful translator)
by jrwendelman on Mar 10, 2009 12:53 PM EDT up reply actions
Plus...
PEDs make players bigger and stronger so if they hit other people they hit harder and cause more damage so it does affect other people.
Pension Plan Puppets: A Toronto Maple Leafs blog and a group therapy session.
Have management accountable, and—if this is deemed to be in the interests of the players’ safety—increase the penalties for infractions.
You can only hold management accountable only if they’re caught, and therein lies the problem as I stated… having a relatively foolproof system to catch these sorta offenses is not exactly easy or practical (that I can think of).
Increasing the penalty/punishment is one way, but again if there’s no sure-fire way of being caught then team management isn’t going to be heavily motivated to make sure these rules are followed.
Again I totally agree that this rule should be strictly enforced, but this isn’t like a player’s skates, sticks are easily interchangable, swapped and even broken and unless the league imposes draconian enforcement tactics, one can easily get away with it.
"God's in His heaven. All's right with the world." - Robert Browning (1812-1889)
Nothing is ever going to be foolproof, but a combination of:
a) Random checks (either totally random or based on a referee’s judgement that a stick may be illegal – if Ron can see it from the bench the refs can see it on the ice)
b) Check the stick of every goal scorer.
Plus increased punishment when caught
by Its Cold In Here on Mar 10, 2009 6:54 PM EDT up reply actions
This entire post is about taking things out of context ;) and Bruce “Malkin to the Kings” Garrioch. It was hard to stay out of character.
By not condemning it though you are tacitly endorsing it.
Pension Plan Puppets: A Toronto Maple Leafs blog and a group therapy session.
If your not with us, you’re against us!
Because Taking The Leafs Seriously Is Not An Option
by JaredFromLondon on Mar 10, 2009 11:47 AM EDT up reply actions
Bingo
Love it or leave it!
Pension Plan Puppets: A Toronto Maple Leafs blog and a group therapy session.
I love how you
used tacitly there… your mastery of words tickles my bikini area
"God's in His heaven. All's right with the world." - Robert Browning (1812-1889)
now theres a mental picture that will take a few bottles to get rid of
Because Taking The Leafs Seriously Is Not An Option
by JaredFromLondon on Mar 10, 2009 11:53 AM EDT up reply actions
Sorry about the crappy translation but this is part of what was said about Spezza’s penalty
I think a warning would be enough for illegal stick. Giving a power play for an insignificant thing is too much.
Как же так может быть?
Haha
That’s like saying…
“I think a warning would be enough for illegal speeding. Giving a ticket for an insignificant thing is too much.”
"God's in His heaven. All's right with the world." - Robert Browning (1812-1889)
curious thought, does shaving the tip down even do anything beneficial to the players shot?
Ive never tried it so I have no idea, I can see where a banana curve could create a difference, but the point?
Because Taking The Leafs Seriously Is Not An Option
by JaredFromLondon on Mar 10, 2009 12:01 PM EDT reply actions
Safe to assume that everyone is prepared for Cherry to go nuts over this on Saturday, right?
We know how he feels about Wilson, and he’s always had Spezza’s back. Could be ugly.
Down Goes Brown - Unapologetically nostalgic for the past. Brutally realistic about the present. Grudgingly optimistic about the future.
by Down Goes Brown on Mar 10, 2009 12:55 PM EDT reply actions
Give me an effing break
Does anyone actually think this incident was ever a safety issue? It never was.
If Wilson was actually concerned about his players’ safety, than he was irresponsible for the first 58 minutes of the game, when he put his players’ safety at risk despite knowing Spezza’s stick was illegal in order to keep some tactical ace up his sleeve. If he was genuinely concerned for the well-being of his players, he would have challenged Spezza after his first shift.
Instead, he waited until the most opportune time, so that his team could gain a two-man advantage late in a one-goal game to try and tie it up.
The contributing factor in Berard’s tragic injury wasn’t an illegal stick, it was gross recklessness on the part of Marian Hossa. Bringing that argument up is a moot point, because the implementation of this rule wouldn’t have prevented what happened to Berard from happening.
by Peter Raaymakers on Mar 10, 2009 1:19 PM EDT reply actions
you’re the one who made it a safety issue…
I don’t understand why you would try and shift the issue from one of your “star” center man cheating, to it being the leagues fault, or Wilson’s fault, or anyone’s fault but Giggles’.
Did spezza cheat? According to the rules of the game at the time of the incident, yes he did. Why he felt the need to cheat is the question I’d be asking…
"We’re looking forward to building the type of team the Rangers are able to buy."
The Left Coast Lock
by blurr1974 on Mar 10, 2009 1:24 PM EDT up reply actions
PPP brought up the safety issue
When he brought up the Berard incident, and when he asked us to measure our eye sockets.
I’m not suggesting it’s anyone’s fault but Spezza’s, I’m just suggesting that a penalty that is enforced once in a decade despite flagrant violations needs to be addressed. Spezza violated the rules, and deserved the associated penalty, but this brings up a grander discussion about the rule.
by Peter Raaymakers on Mar 10, 2009 1:29 PM EDT up reply actions
so
if the rule is inconvenient for your team, it’s an issue.
Here’s a crazy idea…
Don’t cheat.
"We’re looking forward to building the type of team the Rangers are able to buy."
The Left Coast Lock
by blurr1974 on Mar 10, 2009 1:31 PM EDT up reply actions
Its still a safety issue
You’re assuming that Wilson was being irresponsible for his player’s safety for not acting earlier even though there’s no definitive proof or evidence that he was aware of Spezza’s illegal stick earlier. Granted, his withholding the knowledge until the last minute as a tactic trump card can make for a reasonable argument but unless you’re Wilson or one of his assistance, you can’t prove that is he exactly what he did.
Even then its a moot point because Spezza still put other players in danger by willingly and knowingly using an illegal and dangerous stick, and nothing excuses or changes that fact.
"God's in His heaven. All's right with the world." - Robert Browning (1812-1889)
No one ever said that Wilson was concerned about safety. He was concerned with trying to win the game and had the referees implement a rule that is written such that a coach has to request it be applied.
What I said about the safety issue was directed towards Giggles’ idiotic dismissal of a rule merely because it inconvenienced him with a penalty. I tried to point out just why such a rule might be implemented (ie to protect players’ eyeballs to some extent). I then brought up the Berard incident because:
a. it’s a case of an eye injury caused by a stick which ties in with wanting to make it as hard as possible for a stick to get into the eye socket and,
b. once again a senator player decided that he did not have to show any regard for an opponent.
Is that clear enough?
Pension Plan Puppets: A Toronto Maple Leafs blog and a group therapy session.
Well, Wilson said it was 'dangerous'
“Our players competed like heck,” said Wilson. “I wanted at the end to give our guys a chance to win, they tried so hard. The guy is using a stick that’s not only illegal but dangerous. I had an opportunity to call it, so I did.”
So I assume he’s using that dangerousness as further justification, beyond the legality of the stick.
And, according to the Toronto Star, “Wilson said he’s been aware all season that the centre was using an illegal stick.”
by Peter Raaymakers on Mar 10, 2009 2:04 PM EDT up reply actions
Why he made the call to have the stick measured and why he waited to make the call until last night:
I wanted at the end to give our guys a chance to win, they tried so hard
Why Spezza was punished:
The guy is using a stick that’s not only illegal but dangerous
See the difference? Anyway, here’s what pisses me off the most: Jason Spezza’s reaction to the fact that he is endangering an opponent – complete sarcasm and arrogance.
Pension Plan Puppets: A Toronto Maple Leafs blog and a group therapy session.
or the fact that he acted like a 3 year old and tried to hide it seconds after he got burned
Because Taking The Leafs Seriously Is Not An Option
by JaredFromLondon on Mar 10, 2009 2:10 PM EDT up reply actions
here's the deal...
regardless of who the player was. sen, Leaf, Shark, ranger, etc. the stick was illegal.
according to the rules, the coach has the option to request a stick measurement at any point during the game. Was it irresponsible of Wilson to not question the stick earlier in the game? If he knew, without a doubt, that spezza was playing with one, then I say yes. Wilson should have had the stick measured as soon as he could.
That does not excuse spezza from playing with an illegal stick though. it does not excuse him from attempting to break his stick and continue to play with an illegal stick.
all that being said, the fault is always on the offender.
"We’re looking forward to building the type of team the Rangers are able to buy."
The Left Coast Lock
by blurr1974 on Mar 10, 2009 2:09 PM EDT up reply actions
Exactly
The rule was enforced exactly as it is meant to be enforced: at the behest of the opposition.
Consider speeding. It’s always illegal but people do it because they know it’ll only get enforced if the police catch them (the opposition). If they run someone over and kill them they can’t turn around and say “Oh gee well if you are going to have that law on the books you should enforce it all of the time (impossible) or take it off the books (ridiculous).”
Pension Plan Puppets: A Toronto Maple Leafs blog and a group therapy session.
That's not quite the same, though
Because police are always enforcing speeding rules. You don’t have to have someone say, “I think that guy’s speeding, can you check?” to get a ticket. Even random stick-checks would be better enforcement than the way it’s done now, especially if there is a genuine concern for the safety of the players.
And if you run someone over, and speed is deemed to be a factor, you will receive the appropriate punishment. If Spezza had sliced someone’s eyes open, but then gone off the ice and changed his stick, there would have been no associated penalty (aside from high sticking.)
by Peter Raaymakers on Mar 10, 2009 2:25 PM EDT up reply actions
how many times have you passed a cop going say 10 over, maybe 15, or rolled a stop or not signaled and the cop didnt do sweet fuck all? a ton probably. Doesnt make what you did any less illegal or any less warenting of a ticket
Because Taking The Leafs Seriously Is Not An Option
by JaredFromLondon on Mar 10, 2009 2:38 PM EDT up reply actions
BINGO!
There’s a reason the real speed limit is 120 on the 401 and it’s not because people are sneaky.
Pension Plan Puppets: A Toronto Maple Leafs blog and a group therapy session.
PeterR
seems to be miffed about the rules because if the rules had been more strictly enforced, then Wilson wouldn’t have been able to take advantage of Spezza using an illegal stick to gain a 2 man advantage at the end of a game… but then Spezza wouldn’t have been taken advantage of if he wasn’t using an illegal stick in the first place so his argument is kinda moot.
"God's in His heaven. All's right with the world." - Robert Browning (1812-1889)
spezza cheated.
end of story.
"We’re looking forward to building the type of team the Rangers are able to buy."
The Left Coast Lock
by blurr1974 on Mar 10, 2009 2:14 PM EDT up reply actions
Yup
No matter how you argue it, how you present it, or how you look at it, the whole entire situation would have no occurred had Spezza not used an illegal stick, simple as that.
That’s the bottom line.
"God's in His heaven. All's right with the world." - Robert Browning (1812-1889)
Agreed.
That I can agree with. I’m not trying to suggest Spezza wasn’t in violation of the rules.
by Peter Raaymakers on Mar 10, 2009 2:22 PM EDT up reply actions
so what's the issue?
that he got caught?
I really don’t understand why this is being defended, except that, it’s because Toronto was the team that caught you.
Change the scenario. It’s 2007, and you’re playing the Ducks. It’s game 4, and the Ducks are up 2 games to 1. There’s about 2 minutes or so left in the third period. For the sake of the argument, let’s just say the sens are up 2-1. The Anaheim coach calls for a stick measurement on spezza. Refs find an illegal stick, 2 minute penalty.
Would you still be defending spezza? Regardless the outcome of the game, would you be saying it was Bush league for Carlyle to do what he did?
If you answered yes to those last two questions, you need help.
"We’re looking forward to building the type of team the Rangers are able to buy."
The Left Coast Lock
by blurr1974 on Mar 10, 2009 2:29 PM EDT up reply actions
Speaking of which
Anyone have stick-friendly eye sockets? Or do all fall within the 2" range?
Pension Plan Puppets: A Toronto Maple Leafs blog and a group therapy session.
Here's what I find funny
No one’s gotten upset at the one really offensive thing I wrote in that piece.
Pension Plan Puppets: A Toronto Maple Leafs blog and a group therapy session.
We figured
We’ll wait and call you on it at a later time when we can use it as a tactical advantage.
"God's in His heaven. All's right with the world." - Robert Browning (1812-1889)
Huh, what’s all this snow doing in March?
Supporter of the Sergei Berezin "Give and Go" - You give me puck, then you go to hell
Getting away with murder!!!1!11!!!
And then the speeding analogies that followed…spooky.
by Bag O' Pucks on Mar 10, 2009 6:01 PM EDT up reply actions
Welcome
Thanks for joining. And for the sharp eyes.
Wait a second, didn’t the Leafs trade Jonas Hoglund for you?
Pension Plan Puppets: A Toronto Maple Leafs blog and a group therapy session.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Pension Plan Puppets
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
In Association With
Latest Puck Daddy - NHL from Yahoo! Sports
- It’s over: Montreal’s Scott Gomez finally ends goalless streak (Video)
- Scott Hartnell’s goal celebration now includes fighting Dion Phaneuf (Video)
- Puck Previews: Leafs meet Flyers; Steve Yzerman not playing in Winter Classic Alumni Game?
- Three theories on why Hurricanes might pull Tuomo Ruutu off trading block
- Mike Babcock wary of Red Wings on HBO’s ’24/7,’ earning YouTube infamy
Latest stories and headlines from NHL.com
- Bergenheim, Santorelli, Bradley score goals to lead Panthers past Kings 3-1
- Gavrus scores twice, Binnington stops 45 shots as Attack beat Battalion
- Friesen has five points, Visentin makes 18 saves as IceDogs hammer Majors 11-0
- Chris Phillips scores twice in 1,000th game as Senators beat Predators 4-3
- Reid Boucher is shootout hero as Sarnia Sting edge Barrie Colts 3-2
SBNation.com Recent Stories
StatCounter
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
