Headshots Are Ok If You Don’t Like the Guy

At least that is what Rafal Ladysz of The Hockey Writers will have you believe today.  His piece today speaks about Duncan Keith “doing the world a favor” by going after Matt Cooke last Saturday.  Mr. Ladysz speaks of the deliberate nature of the blow to the head that Keith handed Cooke.  Oh of course Rafal attempts to temper his tone behind a mask of compassion saying:

While you never want to see a player get hurt or carried off the ice, it’s hard not to justify Keith’s actions because Matt Cooke was the target.

A True Warrior Keith has fought 4 times in his 5 year NHL career and none since 2007.

In essence, you don’t want to see anyone hurt by a deliberate blow to the head, but this one was ok because he hit Matt Cooke.  The author continues his trek into the land of falsehoods by stating that Keith was retaliating for a hit thrown earlier by Cooke.  Now I have NHL Gamecenter Live and went back and took a look and unless he was retaliating for Artem Anisimov, I don’t see where that statement can be proven true.  However I did note your total lack of video evidence to support your claim.  The only video you do offer is of the actual illegal intentional hit to the head laid by Keith, but lets move on.

Keith must have known he’d be immune from disciplinary events due to being a first-time offender. Nailing No.24 instead of No.87 sits well too.

So Keith premeditated the hit to the head, knowing full well he’d having the blessings of the league in the aftermath because his chosen target was a 3rd line grinder and not a 1st line playmaker?   I’d like to know how long Sean Avery’s sentence is going to be for the run he made at the a fore mentioned 87 the previous weekend.  Additionally you are endorsing the practice of blows to the head on non-stars?  I’m sure Ben Eager and Adam Burish will be glad to see you painting a bulls-eye on their backs. This is one of the most ridiculous things I’ve read in a while.  Someone who actually supports the tiered and broken justice system the NHL currently employs, aka DGB’s suspension chart.

Cooke got what he had coming for a long time. A coward in every sense of the word, he’s got a track record the length of my arm.

Duncan Keith's New Uniform

Truly.  When Cooke laid out Anisimov he threw down later that night willingly.  He didn’t go hide on the bench and refuse to engage and defend his actions like Keith did all night Saturday when Cooke pursued him.  Maybe you need to look up the definition of the word coward.  He did get what he deserved, a two game sit down from Colin Campbell.  Duncan Keith does not work for Campbell to my knowledge so he wasn’t acting as an arm of the league’s official discipline policy as I understand it.  You might have information I am unaware of however as informed as you are, so maybe you can provide it.  Seriously though, Cooke did his time. Why did no Blackhawk teammate come to Keith’s defense?  Maybe they thought he was running scarred too.

He doesn’t have the fortitude to fight after the dirty tactics unless it’s someone with the brawling experience of Ilya Kovalchuk or Ryan Callahan

If he’s such a creampuff, why was Keith running like a frightened kitten from him the rest of the night every time he tired to get him to man up for his actions?

I’m not looking for sympathy for Matt.  What I am looking for is equal application of the law to all parties and advocating head hunting of players “you don’t like” is about the most ridiculous thing I’ve herd since Mike Richards walked after destroying David Booth.  Did David booth do something before that game to someone else that deserved the anvil of justice from Richards?  Yea, I didn’t think so.  Duncan Keith is a coward and showed his goon colors.  Do the world a favor and zip it.

Note:  Shortly after the publication of this piece the article linked above that it was a response to was mysteriously removed from The Hockey Writers without retraction or explanation.  If the link doesn’t work, that is why.

Update – Bruce Hollingdrake, owner of The Hockey Writers, has this to say on the article’s removal:

I thought it lacked good judgement and wasn’t in line with what we try and promote at THW. I hated seeing our name associated with such an article and am rather ashamed of it. By allowing our writers the ability to Publish when they feel the article is ready – it allows for things to slip through. I may have to rethink giving them this leeway.