Page 2 of 2

Re: Langdon Blades

PostPosted: Wed Mar 05, 2008 5:24 pm
by ih8gophers
ButtonsTheClown wrote:
Sportshound wrote:Langdon-- You guys played excellent. Great job you should be proud.

And I heard a little about the incident of the Flyers #14 in a Regular season game getting called for kicking. Word is around that that was not a for sure thing.
He(from most people that I heard it from) said he accidentally got the boot inot the face of the goalie.
So someone out here has that answer right?
So now the question is why didn't he play in the State tourney?
The way I heard it was he served his suspession but the NDAHA brd. didn't let him play anyway?

I see above this-- that a goalie(presume the goalie that got the boot in the face-accidentally) says that the Flyer kid should not have gotten the BIG Penalty?
True--- Not True?
Well It was fun to watch the games in a not so desirable Arena(nice but not that nice)-- And Good luck to nay of you that will get to dream of the State Championship for 09'.. Play hard.


IMO, the suspension was just NDAHA’s way of saying, WE are going to control the outcome of games, not the players. The “kick” was an accident that occurred when 14 came around the back of the net after a save. Drew had the puck covered on the side of the net and 14 lifted his leg to get around him. Did his skate hit him in the head – yes. Was it an “intent to injure?” – no. If I would have seen it as a deliberate kick, I wouldn’t be writing this at all.

They gave him a 5 and a misconduct (not 10). Rules say he must serve the next game (which he did). Then NDAHA got involved and started talking about having a hearing….but they didn’t know when they could get together (even though the state tournament was the next weekend). From what I understand they had “a meeting” before each of the state games and told 14 “no.” Again…control.

The total number of games served for this incident was 5 games. It wasn’t any worse than any checking from behind, roughing, slashing or cross-checking penalty we see in every game. IMO, any of these penalties could be construed as an “intent to injure” but it’s never called that way. Last year during the state tournament WC and the Flames had a fight after their semi-final game – no one got kicked out. Couldn’t fighting be seen as an incident with an intent to injure? The time served in this incident was controlled by the NDAHA – they made sure the kid’s year was ruined by what ONE official perceived as flagrant and intentional. I have respect for the rules but when penalties for breaking the rules are enforced differently, then I have issues. NDAHA made sure they acted as the Judge, Jury and Executioner in this case. The only intent to injure in this case is NDAHA’s fickle decision to keep 14 out of the 3 biggest games of his year. That’s sad.


actually rules say kicking a MATCH PENALTY. that is the reason for the hearing and that's the reason he did not play. the ruling says he sits until there is a hearing and is then approved to play. by the way i was at the game and it looked very deliberate to me. heck the kid didn't even skate to the box, he went straight to the dressing room which leads me to believe he did it on purpose.

Re: Langdon Blades

PostPosted: Wed Mar 05, 2008 7:22 pm
by Sioux4ever
ih8gophers wrote:
ButtonsTheClown wrote:
Sportshound wrote:Langdon-- You guys played excellent. Great job you should be proud.

And I heard a little about the incident of the Flyers #14 in a Regular season game getting called for kicking. Word is around that that was not a for sure thing.
He(from most people that I heard it from) said he accidentally got the boot inot the face of the goalie.
So someone out here has that answer right?
So now the question is why didn't he play in the State tourney?
The way I heard it was he served his suspession but the NDAHA brd. didn't let him play anyway?

I see above this-- that a goalie(presume the goalie that got the boot in the face-accidentally) says that the Flyer kid should not have gotten the BIG Penalty?
True--- Not True?
Well It was fun to watch the games in a not so desirable Arena(nice but not that nice)-- And Good luck to nay of you that will get to dream of the State Championship for 09'.. Play hard.


IMO, the suspension was just NDAHA’s way of saying, WE are going to control the outcome of games, not the players. The “kick” was an accident that occurred when 14 came around the back of the net after a save. Drew had the puck covered on the side of the net and 14 lifted his leg to get around him. Did his skate hit him in the head – yes. Was it an “intent to injure?” – no. If I would have seen it as a deliberate kick, I wouldn’t be writing this at all.

They gave him a 5 and a misconduct (not 10). Rules say he must serve the next game (which he did). Then NDAHA got involved and started talking about having a hearing….but they didn’t know when they could get together (even though the state tournament was the next weekend). From what I understand they had “a meeting” before each of the state games and told 14 “no.” Again…control.

The total number of games served for this incident was 5 games. It wasn’t any worse than any checking from behind, roughing, slashing or cross-checking penalty we see in every game. IMO, any of these penalties could be construed as an “intent to injure” but it’s never called that way. Last year during the state tournament WC and the Flames had a fight after their semi-final game – no one got kicked out. Couldn’t fighting be seen as an incident with an intent to injure? The time served in this incident was controlled by the NDAHA – they made sure the kid’s year was ruined by what ONE official perceived as flagrant and intentional. I have respect for the rules but when penalties for breaking the rules are enforced differently, then I have issues. NDAHA made sure they acted as the Judge, Jury and Executioner in this case. The only intent to injure in this case is NDAHA’s fickle decision to keep 14 out of the 3 biggest games of his year. That’s sad.


actually rules say kicking a MATCH PENALTY. that is the reason for the hearing and that's the reason he did not play. the ruling says he sits until there is a hearing and is then approved to play. by the way i was at the game and it looked very deliberate to me. heck the kid didn't even skate to the box, he went straight to the dressing room which leads me to believe he did it on purpose.


Let's not have this become a one person said this and the other person said that. Obviously if you are a fan of langdon you will say it was deliberate. And if you are from Fargo you will say it wasn't. And, he skated right to the dressing room because the referee told him to. At least understand the situation before making accusations. I do not know the whole story, just what I heard from my contact on the Flyers. Let's just leave the story, over and done with. It is like the 6th man for Grafton-Park River. It's over, lets keep it over. According to the parents I know the Fargo Flyers and G.F. Stallions still have some hockey to play. Good Luck to them. To the rest of the teams, best of luck next season!

Re: Langdon Blades

PostPosted: Wed Mar 05, 2008 9:40 pm
by ih8gophers
Sioux4ever wrote:
ih8gophers wrote:
ButtonsTheClown wrote:
Sportshound wrote:Langdon-- You guys played excellent. Great job you should be proud.

And I heard a little about the incident of the Flyers #14 in a Regular season game getting called for kicking. Word is around that that was not a for sure thing.
He(from most people that I heard it from) said he accidentally got the boot inot the face of the goalie.
So someone out here has that answer right?
So now the question is why didn't he play in the State tourney?
The way I heard it was he served his suspession but the NDAHA brd. didn't let him play anyway?

I see above this-- that a goalie(presume the goalie that got the boot in the face-accidentally) says that the Flyer kid should not have gotten the BIG Penalty?
True--- Not True?
Well It was fun to watch the games in a not so desirable Arena(nice but not that nice)-- And Good luck to nay of you that will get to dream of the State Championship for 09'.. Play hard.


IMO, the suspension was just NDAHA’s way of saying, WE are going to control the outcome of games, not the players. The “kick” was an accident that occurred when 14 came around the back of the net after a save. Drew had the puck covered on the side of the net and 14 lifted his leg to get around him. Did his skate hit him in the head – yes. Was it an “intent to injure?” – no. If I would have seen it as a deliberate kick, I wouldn’t be writing this at all.

They gave him a 5 and a misconduct (not 10). Rules say he must serve the next game (which he did). Then NDAHA got involved and started talking about having a hearing….but they didn’t know when they could get together (even though the state tournament was the next weekend). From what I understand they had “a meeting” before each of the state games and told 14 “no.” Again…control.

The total number of games served for this incident was 5 games. It wasn’t any worse than any checking from behind, roughing, slashing or cross-checking penalty we see in every game. IMO, any of these penalties could be construed as an “intent to injure” but it’s never called that way. Last year during the state tournament WC and the Flames had a fight after their semi-final game – no one got kicked out. Couldn’t fighting be seen as an incident with an intent to injure? The time served in this incident was controlled by the NDAHA – they made sure the kid’s year was ruined by what ONE official perceived as flagrant and intentional. I have respect for the rules but when penalties for breaking the rules are enforced differently, then I have issues. NDAHA made sure they acted as the Judge, Jury and Executioner in this case. The only intent to injure in this case is NDAHA’s fickle decision to keep 14 out of the 3 biggest games of his year. That’s sad.


actually rules say kicking a MATCH PENALTY. that is the reason for the hearing and that's the reason he did not play. the ruling says he sits until there is a hearing and is then approved to play. by the way i was at the game and it looked very deliberate to me. heck the kid didn't even skate to the box, he went straight to the dressing room which leads me to believe he did it on purpose.


Let's not have this become a one person said this and the other person said that. Obviously if you are a fan of langdon you will say it was deliberate. And if you are from Fargo you will say it wasn't. And, he skated right to the dressing room because the referee told him to. At least understand the situation before making accusations. I do not know the whole story, just what I heard from my contact on the Flyers. Let's just leave the story, over and done with. It is like the 6th man for Grafton-Park River. It's over, lets keep it over. According to the parents I know the Fargo Flyers and G.F. Stallions still have some hockey to play. Good Luck to them. To the rest of the teams, best of luck next season!


i'm actually not a fan of either team. i was in town for work and i thought i would catch a junior gold game. i had never watched on b4. now i was just stating my opinion on what i saw. i could be wrong but i did not see the official say anything to the kid, he may have. i'm just trying to make my point that no matter the intent. a kick to another player is a match penalty.

Re: Langdon Blades

PostPosted: Wed Mar 05, 2008 9:49 pm
by Sioux4ever
ih8gophers wrote:i'm actually not a fan of either team. i was in town for work and i thought i would catch a junior gold game. i had never watched on b4. now i was just stating my opinion on what i saw. i could be wrong but i did not see the official say anything to the kid, he may have. i'm just trying to make my point that no matter the intent. a kick to another player is a match penalty.


Thanks for the rulebook refresher. Like I said, one side says he kicked the kid, the other side says he didn't. One opinion over another is just that, an opinion. Just like if they asked they langdon player if he was kicked. Or course he is going to say he did. And the fargo player is going to say he didn't kick him. It was ruled on, and decided upon, fairly or not, it is done. Let's move on. Langdon's season is over. State tournament is over. On to the 2008-2009 season.

Re: Langdon Blades

PostPosted: Thu Mar 06, 2008 5:55 pm
by dcs01
you dont kick somebody in the head with a knife tied to ur foot and expect to get away with it the reff saw it was a intent to injur thats just how things work if you accidently hit someone with your car chances are your gonna get in trouble its too bad number 14 had to sit the whole tournement but thats how rules work

Re: Langdon Blades

PostPosted: Thu Mar 06, 2008 6:09 pm
by Sioux4ever
dcs01 wrote:you dont kick somebody in the head with a knife tied to ur foot and expect to get away with it the reff saw it was a intent to injur thats just how things work if you accidently hit someone with your car chances are your gonna get in trouble its too bad number 14 had to sit the whole tournement but thats how rules work


Okay then. That's a heck of a comparision. You may want to try pay attention in class a bit more and learn how to spell simple words like accidentally, injure, tournament.

Re: Langdon Blades

PostPosted: Thu Mar 06, 2008 8:55 pm
by LB22
Sioux4ever wrote:Okay then. That's a heck of a comparision. You may want to try pay attention in class a bit more and learn how to spell simple words like accidentally, injure, tournament.


How would you compare it then??? What if it was your son that got kicked in the head, or even better if it was a stallion player on the other side of this...you would think otherwise.