dekedangle_rpfanon | #23 — Brown Goes Down

This is the twenty-third post of Deke Dangle RPF Anon, a community for all your ice hockey anon meme needs.

THE RULES

1. Mods retain the right to delete, freeze, and/or screen threads and comments.
2. Meme rules do not require warnings.
3. Respect flock. Do not repost or share information from private tumblrs, locked twitter accounts, flocked LJ posts, etc.
4. No linking fans to their real life identities.
5. No looks bashing or body shaming. This applies to players and people associated with those players and their clubs, as well as fellow fans.
6. No embedded music.
7. No embedded images.
8. No spamming the meme, whether through repeated comments or other means.
9. No discussing trolling, individual trolls, or their efforts.

Meme rules do not require spoiler cuts. However, this layout does allow for them. Any of the following tags will create a spoiler cut when closed: <div cut>, <span cut>, <font cut>, <font color="white">

If you have any questions or concerns, please direct them to The Mod Post.

Threaded View
Flat View
Top-Level Comment View

Next post opens at 5,000 comments.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

At this point, I don't think you're even familiar with the concept of hearings.

Stop trying to appeal to your ~superior knowledge to make a dubious argument. It doesn't magically become a dirty hit only once DoPS determines it is. Everyone with eyes could see it was an indefensibly dirty hit right away (including almost every Caps fan who had anything to say about it). Blaming the victim's actions for the results of a dirty hit = bad, and Trotz did not have "plausible deniability" of thinking it could have been a clean hit just because the DoPS hearing hadn't occurred yet, especially as he said he had had a look at the hit. But even if you thought you could argue that, now DoPS has ruled that the hit was terrible and Orpik himself had said the punishment was fair, and Trotz is still here whining about how the suspension was too long and it's only because it's the Pens and Maatta was obviously hurt in the last series. But sure, anyone who finds that objectionable is just too dense to understand what a hearing is, lol.

AYRT

I've read the entire discussion in all the many threads and you're just tilting at windmills. I don't recall a single person in this entire meme who disagreed that it was a dirty hit, which shows how obvious it is.

You want to fuss and foam over every out-of-context comment on twitter like it has some significance and isn't normal coach and player speak. Of course, Orpik admitted fault at the hearing. Of course, Trotz is unhappy with the length of the suspension. How is this news to you?

http://dekedangle-rpfanon.dreamwidth.org/6145.html?thread=28836353#cmt28836353

No, you're shifting the goalposts. Someone (you?) were arguing that Trotz's comments about Maatta AREN'T blaming the victim's actions for a dirty hit because Trotz could have plausibly thought it was clean (lol). The person who objected to what Trotz said about Maatta obviously had just never seen a DoPS video! (or obviously was unfamiliar with the concept of a hearing!) That argument of "Trotz isn't defending dirty play, he thought it was clean at the time he was interviewed!" is even more absurd given what Trotz is saying today.

I don't see any way in which these comments are being taken out of context, and just because it is "normal coach speak" (which unfortunately it is) doesn't mean that we can't find this particular instance of it objectionable. (Especially if he actually said "but Maatta was already injured!" lol.)

Especially if he actually said "but Maatta was already injured!"

https://twitter.com/BWest_Trib/status/727205168077410305

Trotz did actually suggest that, and that imo goes beyond "normal coach speak" in terms of comments about player safety. Using Maatta's injury history (and inventing new parts of it!) to downplay how bad Orpik's hit was is pretty gross.

(He's not wrong that suspensions shouldn't be given based on injury, but that decision's out of DoPS's hands, and Orpik's hit is terrible regardless of its outcome.)

AYRT

Yes, I read that comment. No, I didn't make it. I don't think your interpretation of it is accurate, but that's neither here nor there.

The part which makes you sound like you're unfamiliar with the concept of hearings is that you think today's comments are proof that you have watched a DoPS video (I assume that's you, anyway) when they aren't related. To be clear, I didn't mean that you weren't clear on the concept of DoPS hearings in particular, but any kind. Parking tickets, whatever.

Are they transcribing the entire interview word-for-word on Twitter? Because if not, that's what out-of-context means.

Sure, a person can object to his comments. People have elsewhere in this thread. They managed to do it without sounding like you, which is why you got the comment about seeming unfamiliar with how these things play out.

I can't think of many different ways to interpret "Trotz wasn't blaming Maata for getting hit with a dirty hit, which seems to be what you think. He was speculating that maybe the hit was clean, which he can plausibly claim to think is a possibility."

I wasn't the original recipient of "you haven't watched a DoPS video!!" but who was trying to say today's comments were proof of having watched a DoPS video?? They're proof that Trotz is willing to defend a dirty play even after DoPS rules it's dirty, and proof that Trotz is in fact blaming Maatta for getting hit with a dirty hit (which is what he was dong before, too).

LOL who was trying to use today's comments to ~prove they're familiar with DoPS videos? They were making fun of someone trying to use that to derail criticism of Trotz's comments yesterday.

It wasn't even an argument. It was just someone being insulting. If you don't respond to them, it forces them to actually making statements, possibly with evidence, if they want to engage with you.

#23 — Brown Goes Down

Re: What's Up With Your Team? - Playoffs Round 2

Re: What's Up With Your Team? - Playoffs Round 2

Re: What's Up With Your Team? - Playoffs Round 2

Re: What's Up With Your Team? - Playoffs Round 2

Re: What's Up With Your Team? - Playoffs Round 2

Re: What's Up With Your Team? - Playoffs Round 2

Re: What's Up With Your Team? - Playoffs Round 2

Re: What's Up With Your Team? - Playoffs Round 2

Re: What's Up With Your Team? - Playoffs Round 2