Saturday, May 10, 2008

Ribeiro's slash on Osgood not suspension-worthy / UPDATE: No suspensions, just fines all around

Damned Red Wings! They make it look so easy out there don't they? But that is what a team that is completely on the same page does, as Kris Draper had alluded to after the Wings' 2-1 victory Saturday.
The Stars look either out of gas, outclassed, or both. They just can't sustain any pressure or even get any pucks to the net. The Stars could use a shot of adrenaline, and maybe returning home for Game 3 might do that. For now, the curse of Dallas winning in Detroit still lives.
Besides all of that, what happened post game was a piss off for me, for several reasons.
1. Mike Ribeiro turned around and slashed Chris Osgood after the final horn sounded. Why did he do that? No, it was not because Osgood was chirping at him. It was because Ozzie sneakingly raised his stick hand as Ribeiro skated past him and caught him in the face with the butt end of his stick. It was intentional. Ribeiro, obviously angered by that dirty play and the loss, turned around and whacked Osgood over the chest with his stick.
2. Oh yeah, then the CBC panel gets all over Ribeiro because it looked so bad. Not one of them even noticed that Osgood butt-ended Ribeiro! Fools! Did any of the American commentators catch on to that? Because our guys didn't.
3. Osgood falls over like he's been shot to sell the slash. If any of you have ever worn goalie equipment, you will understand that getting slashed in the chest doesn't hurt. A guy could stand there and do that to you all day. But Osgood lay on the ice like the classless fucking idiot that he is!
And to top that off, the Detroit netminder is interviewed post game and says that the slash caught him in the ribs and that basically the League needs to look at it!

“Even if I did butt-end him, it was an accident,” Osgood said. “I was trying to protect our best player, Nick Lidstrom, so he didn’t get run.”

Fuck off! Be a man and own up to the stick job you put on Ribeiro! Gutless puke. (For the record, Lidstrom wasn't behind the net when the horn sounded, he was in front of Osgood.)
Even this ESPN footage doesn't capture the Osgood butt-end properly. Everyone only sees the slash. And the jackass media cries fowl and wonders if a suspension will come. I know that the NHL will see the whole incident, and probably let Ribeiro off easy. They should. If Ribeiro gets any punishment, Osgood should as well. (Here's a good clip of the whole incident from ESPN. Thanks Tapeleg for the link.)
4. The strange thing that angers me is that I'm defending Mike the Spineless Star Weasel Ribeiro. What has it come to? There are not enough teams in the top 4 that I like!
5. Hockey is turning into soccer. Bunch of diving assholes out there. Hail to those who don't dive and play like men with honor. The rest of them need to check if they have any balls attached to them.

Yeah, I'm pissed off. The sport that I love is turning into a god damned joke.
So no, Ribeiro should not be suspended. More like Osgood needs some lessons in class. I would have slashed the jackass too.
But at least there is more emotion in this series now.

UPDATE FROM TSN: Osgood, Ribeiro and Ott will all be fined but not suspended. Nice! I agree with the NHL on this call.

T Tags:

Labels: ,


At May 10, 2008 at 9:26 p.m. , Anonymous Anonymous said...

Yeah I'd like to reply to that. The Butt-end On osgood was NOT intentional. Ozzie even said himself he did it on Accident. That does not take away the fact that Ribeiro 2 handed cross checked Ozzie across the chest. That is a dirty Play! You can't say that was alright. Idc How much padding OZzie had on there, you're a professional, act like one.

At May 10, 2008 at 9:32 p.m. , Blogger Zanstorm said...

We'll disagree that Osgood's butt ending was not intentional. Watch the clip again, you'll see. What Osgood said and what he means or knows are/were 2 different things. This is what I hate about the NHL now. Not only will these douchebags dive, but they'll also lie about in their post game interviews so that a star player gets suspended.
I am a man who tells it like it is, and I say Osgood is full of shit and a diving jackass.
Ribeiro's slash across Osgood's chest was dirty, yes. If Ribeiro was smart, he would have ripped Ozzy's mask off and broke his damned nose.

At May 11, 2008 at 1:26 a.m. , Anonymous Anonymous said...

I have watched this clip over and over now. Ozzie casually lifted his arm and stick as a deterrent to the skater. Ozzie's stick hitting him was completely accidental. I have no idea what you are seeing. It is something I have seens goalies do over and over as skater's pass them. 99.99% of the time it results in nothing. The skater either goes around the outstretched arm or skates right through it. This time the butt-end of the stick just happened to hit the skater. It was completely unintentional. By the way, Chris Osgood has been nothing but a class act on the ice and in the community his entire career. Your comments regarding his actions are ignorant to say the least.

At May 11, 2008 at 5:28 a.m. , Anonymous Anonymous said...

Who is the idiot that wrote this article? Chris Osgood is the classiest Goalie in hockey. Your boy Ribeiro acted classless with his slash. What does it matter if it hurt or not? It was a stupid move and he should be suspended for his stupidity.

At May 11, 2008 at 5:37 a.m. , Blogger paul.klos said...

The thing is Ribeiro patently and plainly retaliated and that usually is the kiss-of-death/penalty in life and in hockey. You didn't see Holmstrom turn and two-hand Turco for any of the head shots he got form said goalie. Sure Osgood went down with a bit of acting élan, but please save the outrage – he drew retaliation intentionally or not and rolled with the flow. If Ribeiro gets suspended than maybe he will remember to think about his actions and suppress his chop, leaving Osgood’s butt-end as fodder for his Coach and GM to work the league and media with for 48 hours

At May 11, 2008 at 8:32 a.m. , Anonymous Whiskey McClinton said...

Goalies have an unfair advantage when it comes to protective gear. I've had the same thing happen to me playing hockey. I was circling behind the net, and the opposing goalie casually put his stick out in front of my face. This is a well known dirty play. If you watch the replay, you'll see Osgood intentionally stretches his stick out in the path of the passing player. Osgood has a full mask, plus ample padding. Ribeiro does not.
I think a message should be sent, and both players receive multiple game suspensions, plus fines.
The final proof that Osgood crossed the line? His own teammates saw what he did, and rushed to the scene, because they knew Ribeiro would retaliate. Both these players are guilty. They are also two of the best players from each team in these playoffs. A suspension to both of them would really make their teams feel it.

At May 11, 2008 at 8:34 a.m. , Anonymous Tapeleg said...

This ESPN clip shows about the butt-end better.

Osgood can say what he wants, but he still has to be responsible for his stick. It was a butt-end, to a players face, like it or not.

No, Ribeiro should not have slashed him back, but the league should do something, anything, to Osgood. Maybe a one game suspension. He plainly dove, he did butt end a guy in the face, end of story.

Of course, in this NHL, nothing will happen. The league is to afraid of messing with success to make players responsible for their actions.

At May 11, 2008 at 9:04 a.m. , Blogger paul.klos said...

I don't see a lot of anyone rushing to the area until Ribeiro is just about to whack Osgood and then its just the Redwing player next to him - presumably he noticed the either the Ribeiro hefting his stick or he said something as he did it. No one else really reacts till after the slash.

At May 11, 2008 at 9:20 a.m. , Anonymous Anonymous said...

The entire point that you seem to be missing here, is that there was no intent to HURT by Osgood. Yes, he stuck his stick out. Did he intentionally stick the guy in the face? No. Did Osgood mean to cause Ribeiro pain? No. Did he do it to stop him from running whooever was behind the net? Yes.

Should Ribeiro have been running someone after the buzzer? No. Was there intent to hurt by Ribeiro in his slash? Yes.

The biggest difference between the two was the intent. Osgood's sticking was not vicious, and Ribeiro's two hander was.

At May 11, 2008 at 9:38 a.m. , Anonymous Anonymous said...

my advice, don't watch the game if all you are going to do is bitch about it. It does NOT look like Osgood intentionally hit Riberio, and then Riberio comes back and hits him across the chest. In the video, it seems as simple as that. The press is going to tell both sides of the story, where Dallas is going to twist the story to turn the blame on Osgood, and detroit is going to embellish the situation to try to fight for a suspension. Plain and simple.

At May 11, 2008 at 10:16 a.m. , Anonymous Anonymous said...

Saying Osgood's butt end was not intention because he said he didn't mean to is like saying Ribeiro didn't mean to slash Osgood, he meant to score. Don't be an idiot man. He did it on purpose, he didn't even know who was behind him. He was trying to get a cheap shot in and it worked. I think they both should be suspended 2 games, or no suspensions for either. Will be an interesting game if they both play.

Oh btw, the American guys did finally pick up the Butt End but no one mentioned the blatent dive and death acting by the goalie. I lost a lot of respect for Osgood with that play.

Tig's all the way to the cup!

At May 11, 2008 at 10:32 a.m. , Anonymous Anonymous said...

He knew there was a red wing player behind him. Does it really matter who it was? Ribeiro was running at someone after the buzzer.

I know you may not have read my previous post closely, so I'll try to make it more clear to you:

Please try to understand the huge, massive different in intent between the two plays. I said that Osgood intentionally stuck his stick out. However, Osgood's intention was to slow him down, NOT to hurt him. It wasn't meant as a cheap shot, it was meant as a "you're not running my players after the game is over" (which, correct me if I'm wrong, is a rather cheap thing to do)

Similarly, you could say that Ribeiro's slash was more of a "don't butt-end me", but his intention was to hurt. That's what two-handers to the upper body area generally mean, pads or no.

So try to understand the difference in intent - not whether they wanted to stick someone, but what they hoped to accomplish. Osgood was trying to slow Ribeiro down. Ribeiro tried to hurt Osgood. There you go.

At May 11, 2008 at 11:52 a.m. , Blogger Zanstorm said...

Alright, I agree that goalies generally "try to slow an opposing player down" by sticking their arm out like that. But you don't know for sure that Osgood's butt-ender was accident. You just have his word on that. Remember, Osgood denied even doing it on CBC right after the game.
I don't mean to cut down Osgood as an overall person, and I'm sure he is a class act in other areas. Just not this one.
Tapeleg's link to the video clip is good! Thanks Taper. Check it out 'Anonymous':
Aha! Intentional! Get your head out of Osgood's ass! (Just buggin')

At May 11, 2008 at 12:11 p.m. , Blogger Zanstorm said...

Yay! Bob McKenzie agrees with me! I must be right then! :)

At May 11, 2008 at 2:05 p.m. , Anonymous hockeyfan said...

Trying to compare these two actions, like Barry Melrose did on ESPN, is beyond moronic. Osgood did not intentionally make a butting action with his stick. He simply just stuck his arm and stick outward. This is a common action by goalies to force skaters to go around them. The result: it slows the skater down and can somtimes save a teammate from a heavy check. The only reason why the skater ran into the stick is because he was hunched over trying to cut around the net. Yes, players, including goalies, need to be more responsible with their sticks. The skater was not cut, so the result should have been a two minute high-sticking penalty for Osgood. That's it. It's just like any other high-sticking penalty, whether it was intentional or not. However, Ribeiro action was a clearly intentional B.C. two-hander to Osgood's torso with intent to injure. Do you really think the thought in Ribeiro's head as he swung his stick was, "Gee. Ozzie has goalie pads on...this won't hurt him." He will and should be suspended. It's amazing to me that anyone could even argue the equality of the two actions.

At May 11, 2008 at 2:12 p.m. , Anonymous Anonymous said...

as i saw it, ribeiro was taking a run at the wings captain after the buzzer. that's something he'd have to answer to on the ice as soon as the next puck drops. and if ribeiro's doing that, then he's already rushing in with a hot head. ozzie put out the stick, you can see that, but he's got the stick vertical to slow/divert ribeiro, and he's got his head turned the other direction, cause there's more guys coming around behind the net. yeah, it looks like osgood clipped ribeiro. throw out the fact that ribeiro's running at lidstrom, if this is in the normal course of the game, osgood gets 2 mins for interference. maybe 2 for a slash, but there's no harm, no intent, no blood.

ribeiro should get at least a game, because he took the two-handed swing with the intent to injure. nobody can say it was justified. pads or not, ribeiro broke his stick over osgood, so nobody can say osgood didn't feel anything. i'm not exactly sure why osgood'd need to sell it - that's pretty obviously suspension-worthy in its own right.

what ribeiro should have done was call out osgood and drop the gloves. osgood went toe-to-toe with roy in 98 when that rivalry was strong. ribeiro needs to man up, especially if the league doesn't suspend him, cause if ribeiro is on the ice monday night, there's a handful of redwings who are going to be forming a line after darren mccarty to beat the fuck out of that coward ribeiro.

At May 11, 2008 at 3:53 p.m. , Blogger Temujin said...

I think I'd rather take a full-on slash to the chest protector than a butt-end to the face. Just me though. Maybe I'm weird that way.

At May 11, 2008 at 4:10 p.m. , Blogger New Sisyphus said...

The Versus crew picked up the Osgood "here, Ribeiro's face, meet the butt end of my goalie stick" move pretty much right away. It was beyond obvious in the Versus playback that Osgood lifted the stick up at the last second that that the butt end would hit Ribeiro's face as he skated by.

Ribeiro, however, cannot retaliate by slashing a player using the stick like a baseball bat in an all-news-team brawl. He's gonna get suspended for that, I think.

Anyway, the point is that Versus picked it up as a retaliation to a stick to the face right away and I am surprised the CBC guys didn't.

At May 11, 2008 at 4:16 p.m. , Blogger New Sisyphus said...

Zanstorm, looks like you were right on the money, man.

From TSN:

The National Hockey League will not suspend any Dallas Star or Detroit Red Wing players for late game antics that occurred late in Game 2 of the Western Conference final.

Stars centre Mike Ribeiro turned up the dial on the nastiness meter at the conclusion of Game 2 after slashing Red Wings' goaltender Chris Osgood in the chest as the buzzer sounded on a 2-1 Detroit victory. The Stars' centre was handed a match penalty for attempt to injure, which carried with it an automatic review by NHL officials. Seconds before the incident, Osgood stuck the butt-end of his stick out as Ribeiro skated by the Detroit net, prompting Ribeiro's retaliation.

Both players have been fined undisclosed amounts by the NHL.

At May 11, 2008 at 4:16 p.m. , Anonymous Anonymous said...

Anybody who's ever played hockey knows that the guy that retaliates gets the worst of it from the officials. Always has, always will. Ribeiro should get by with a fine but with the way the NHL has been cracking down on this stuff a suspension is not out of the question. In terms of stick work by the goalies, it's easy to talk about one incident but that stuff went on all game by both teams. Turco got by with quite a few himself during the game. As far as diving goes, it’s been that way ever since hockey came to Hollywood in the late sixties. You've got to go back to original six to find a game void of an occasional dive. Fact is it often works to embellish a call and teams in the playoffs score around 20% of the time on the P-Play. Regrettably it's here to stay. Unless ofcourse they replay every play and have some Bettman hack in a booth make the call. Let’s hope that doesn't happen.

At May 11, 2008 at 4:21 p.m. , Blogger Zanstorm said...

Thanks for that, Sisyphus. This argument can get super technical if we want it to be. Swinging a stick at someone like it's a baseball bat is not good and will be frowned upon. Osgood's butt-ender may have looked harmless, but what if it caught Ribby's eye?
Glad to see more people agree that Ozzie's stick action WAS intentional. Unfortunately, there's already rules and penalties in place for guys that golf swing at somebody. It's just not fair if Osgood gets nothing.
And he is still is a diving little puke, I don't care what anyone says.

Jin: No kidding! But like someone here has said, Ribeiro should have ripped Osgood's mask off and pummeled him...or at least tried to.

Ah! Update! No suspensions to anyone. Just fines to Osgood, Ribeiro and Ott. Perfect!

At May 11, 2008 at 5:43 p.m. , Anonymous Anonymous said...

Whether Osgood nudged somebody or not, you DON'T lift your stick and SLASH somebody. Ribeiro is a prick - and so are all of you who are defending him.

At May 11, 2008 at 5:54 p.m. , Blogger Zanstorm said...

Blah, if you are the same anonymous who has been commenting on this post the whole time you've been served. The NHL made the right call. Osgood's stick work wasn't a nudge.... so you should stop defending HIM. He wanted to hurt Ribeiro with the butt of his stick. That's how the NHL saw it and I am glad that both players were fined in the end. That is what I wanted to see. Fairness.

At May 11, 2008 at 10:06 p.m. , Anonymous hockeyfan said...

Wow. I can't believe this debate rages on. Zanstrom, you think that the NHL ruling on this justifies your opinion? The NHL took the easy way out. Period. The NHL still can't enforce their own rule changes they made several years ago. And you think they got this right? And until you know the amounts of the fines to each player, you have no idea how the NHL actually saw this. Ribeiro's fine could have been five times that of Osgood's. You don't know.

Osgood casually outstretched his stick arm as Ribeiro skated by him. It was a deterrent! Goalies do it all the time to make skaters change direction and slow down! Stop with this nonsense that Osgood was trying to hurt him. It is ridiculous. The contact was incidental and accidental.

Think about it this way. Why in the world would a 8-0 goaltender stick a guy in the face with no time remaining in a game his team had already won???? Where is the motivation? Where does this rage come from?? Why would he risk a suspension?? What possible explanation is there for this type of behavior??? The answer is none. There is no explanation. It didn't happen!!!!

Osgood is not part of the team that is getting their butts kicked on the ice, and he is not part of the team that is now consistently showing physical acts of complete frustration. Osgood is the cool, confident, collected veteran goalie of the Wings who hasn't lost a game in the playoffs.

Zanstrom, there is absolutely no reason to justify your explanation to Ozzie's actions. You just watched a video and cast an opinion...a highly debated opioion.

There is no debate over Ribeiro's intentions because everyone now knows his motivation and the action was clear-cut. Ozzie's action was not clear-cut and he had absolutely zero motivation. And he has a clear track record.

Sorry, Zanstrom, if I am going to attack someone's character, then I am going to need more than just to watch a video and cast an uninformed opinion.

At May 11, 2008 at 11:53 p.m. , Blogger Zanstorm said...

"The contact was incidental and accidental."

You know what? Your defence of Osgood is just as absurd as my attack on Osgood. And your reasons for questioning why he would do that (or proofs that he wouldn't) are just as potentially bogus as my video-watching. We will never know Osgood's true intentions, so we will stick to our opinions.
But don't put him in an upper-class category...please.
Ribeiro has come a long way from his diving antics with the Habs against the Bruins. So I respect how far he has come. He was wrong for swinging at Ozzie. Ozzie was wrong for stubbing Ribeiro.
The NHL has no real way of determining if Osgood meant to or not except for his WORD on it. Well that's not good enough. A decision was made, and I don't care who got more of a fine. As long as they both got one and not one over the other was suspended.
My wish was granted.
Osgood is a diving jackass. But so are many other players. Screw them too. I don't like that shiz.

Hey, I'm not biased. I hate when Luongo dives too. It's fucking pathetic. So I will continue to attack their characters as far as that goes.
Don't paint Osgood as Jesus though.
He stubbed Ribeiro and Ribeiro should have ripped his goalie mask off and punched him in the nose, not swung his stick at him.
At the end of the day, the 2-hander looks worse, but Osgood instigated it by stubbing Ribeiro. If you want to get technical, one isn't worse than the other.
But hey...continue defending Ozzie. That is your choice. I just don't agree.
But it has been a hell of an argument.

At May 12, 2008 at 1:29 a.m. , Anonymous hockeyfan said...

Zanstrom, this is a fun debate and I do respect your opinion. I do not think you are biased, and I do not think Ozzie is Jesus (not sure where you got that from). However, I think I am offering more points in this debate than you are. And that's the difference.

Yes, I agree, neither you nor I have any idea of Ozzie's true intentions. Don't assume I am taking him at his word. I am not. I am trying to make an educated guess based on what I know to be true. Yet, all you offer is what you saw in the video and assume that he did it intentionally. I am offering more than that. Here are my points again that led to my conclusion.

1. Ozzie's outward arm/stick motion is a common goalie deterrent action
2. Ozzie had zero motivation to intentionally hit someone with his stick
3. Ozzie had zero motivation to intentionally injure someone with his stick
4. Ozzie has a clean track record regarding dirty plays
5. Ozzie has been a class-act his entire career.

On the other hand, Ribeiro's actions were clearly intentional and motivated. His team had just lost again. He was frustrated. And then he got hit in the jaw by Osgood's stick. So he lost his mind and tried to maim Osgood. Ribeiro's actions are not in debate. Intent is the hardest thing to prove, yet in this case Ribeiro's actions were clear-cut.

See, I have offered up valid reasons to justify my conclusion. You have offered none.

That being said, you and I can debate all day long regarding Ozzie's intentions. We will never truly know. Yet Ribeiro's intentions and motivation are irrefutable. Therefore, until you can prove your claim of Ozzie's intentions, you cannot compare the two actions. The debate is not on even ground. Do you understand what I am saying??

If you want to start a debate entitled, "What is worse, a butt-end stick to the face or a two-handed slash to a goalie's chest," then fine. You would win. The stick to the face is worse. However, that is not the debate. The debate is whether or not Ozzie meant what he did. My opinion is 'no' based on the reasons I listed above. What are your reaons for thinking he did mean it? All you have offered so far is your interpretation of the video replay. Sorry, that's not enough.

At May 12, 2008 at 12:51 p.m. , Blogger Zanstorm said...

Ah the debate goes on.
Ribeiro hit a chest protector on a goalie. Maybe he thought that and knew it wouldn't hurt him and so it was just a retaliation.

"On the other hand, Ribeiro's actions were clearly intentional and motivated."
Yes they were. And I still think Osgood's intentions were the same, just less blatantly obvious. I don't care about Ozzie's track record. It may or may not apply here.
Yes, goalies do stick their arm out to deter a charging opposing player from going around the net and hitting someone. So? That doesn't mean Osgood didn't have intent to stick Ribeiro. Maybe he used that common practice as a decoy to take a stab at him and get away with it.

Your 5 points of defence are good for you to jusitfy YOUR position in your mind, but I find them bunk and heresay. They don't hold water. Nor do any of my reasons (like being captain video). That's why neither one of us will know Osgood's true intent. I just made the assumption and stuck to it. I'm not going to give you a 5-point list to debate with you. Both players were in the wrong and one 'looked' worse than the other.
Obviously the NHL saw some kind of intent there on Ozzie's part. Last time I checked, players don't get fined for accidental high sticking.

"So he lost his mind and tried to maim Osgood"

Wow. Exaggeration.

At May 13, 2008 at 12:46 a.m. , Anonymous hockeyfan said...

Hey, Zantsorm. Good debate. It was fun. I enjoyed it. I am going to sign off because my interest level has decreased. The Wings just played and won again.

Looking forward to to the next controversial play and blogging/debating about it.

Good stuff. I like your site.


Detroit, Michigan

At May 13, 2008 at 7:29 a.m. , Blogger Zanstorm said...

thanks, dude. We'll yakk again!


Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home

Waiting For Stanley was created in June 2006.