Bourque to face disciplinary hearing

Robert Cleave
January 04 2012 09:08AM

 

The Flames' woes on the road continued last night with a loss versus the Capitals, and further bad news might be just around the corner. Rene Bourque has a hearing with the Sheriff today, following a hit on Nick Backstrom late in last night's loss.

With a hat tip to Kukla's Korner, here's video of the infraction:

 

 

That's not good. Bourque, at least to my eyes, appeared to target Backstrom's noggin with his elbow, and given his recent run-in with the law after the Seabrook hit, there's a chance he might get an extended vacation. That's the type of predatory play that the league has been attempting to eliminate, so with Bourque's past status factored in, another suspension seems like it could be in the cards. Thoughts?

 

Edit: 5 games for Bourque. Here's the video explanation.

 

1a1030a8151ca7a0d81aea58f0fb1dbc
Robert Cleave is a perpetually grumpy Winnipegger.
Avatar
#1 icedawg_42
January 04 2012, 09:15AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
1
props

Man - that guy needs to wake up! There's NOTHING more frustrating than sitting on the bench at a critical time of the game, and seeing one of "the usual suspects" take a dumb needless penalty. With Bork, it's every game, he'll take a stick infraction 200 feet from his goalie, when the game is on the line. This one, I think the elbow is pretty obvious....intent or no intent, he's upright as tall as he can be, with his elbow up. Brace yourself Bork, long weekend ahead for you!

Avatar
#2 Graham
January 04 2012, 10:02AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
1
props

I was hoping that Bourque would have a decent seasaon, and that we could possibly unload him at the trade deadline... Based on this season, guess we are stuck with his contract for this and four more seasons.

Bourque has to be one of the most frustrating players on the team. He has the skills to dominate games, and the skills to be invisible, if not damaging to the squad.

Problem is, the invisible / damaging skill's seems to dominate. He seems to really miss Langkow at center.

Avatar
#3 ville de champignons
January 04 2012, 11:27AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
1
props

Borkie just wants an extended time for "personal maintenance issues" and Sutter apparently said 'no'. Problem solved.

Avatar
#4 icedawg_42
January 04 2012, 09:15AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

---- and did I mention a trip straight to Butter's doghouse when he returns.

Avatar
#5 xis10ce
January 04 2012, 09:17AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

Backstrom played another couple shifts and did not return to the game after those couple. I get the feeling that we got a bigger suspension coming up based on

- Apparent Injury (see above) - Intent to injure (head targeted [appears to be]) - Past history (Seabrook)

Avatar
#6 Kent Wilson
January 04 2012, 09:29AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

That's really ugly. Five or more games isn't out of the question.

Avatar
#8 Shawn
January 04 2012, 09:56AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

Is there any possibility we can get the NHL to give Bourque a 2 out of three suspension for the rest of the season? He seems to disappear for two games, then play well for one, then disappear for another 2....

Avatar
#9 Domebeers.com
January 04 2012, 10:00AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

Guys, some of us have played the game. Lets stop pretending. Bourque does what he does because he is allowed to. The coach never comes down hard on him, so why should he change the way he plays?

When I did stupid stuff, I wouldn't see the ice again. You stop doing stupid stuff pretty quick.

Hate to blame the coach, but the amount of stupid, like RC said, is getting to be a joke, and to me, I point my finger at coach and his ability (or lack of it) to install some discipline.

Avatar
#10 Reidja
January 04 2012, 10:05AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

Such a lack of respect is inexcusable. Does a phone hearing mean that his max suspension is 5? I'd give him 8-10 for that. Blatant intent to injure... And from a guy who was concussed by an elbow last season... Terrible.

Avatar
#11 Rain Dogs
January 04 2012, 10:08AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

Crap....you can't even be a homer and defend that it's so obvious.

I call 4 games. But it likely should be 6.

And now we're out how many regulars vs Boston? 6? Gio, Smith, Tanguay, Moss, Stajan and now Bourque.

Man, we're screwed against Boston. 5-0... I'm calling it now.

Avatar
#12 Reidja
January 04 2012, 10:08AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

@Domebeers.com

Other than the idiot who throws the elbow, there are a lot of external participants in an infraction like this. Sure you could blame the coach, but you could also blame the NHL for the instigator rule...

Bourque would think twice about doing this again if someone beat the snot out of him for it... which he certainly deserves.

Avatar
#13 bookofloob
January 04 2012, 10:16AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

Mr. Shanahan, repeat offender on Line 2.

Avatar
#14 Kent Wilson
January 04 2012, 10:32AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

@Reidja

The instigator rule never stopped plays like this in the past. It just meant a couple guys would fight about it afterwards.

Avatar
#15 Reidja
January 04 2012, 10:46AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

I'm up for any rule change that allows someone to beat the crap out of a player that pulls this. That or criminal charges... One or the other.

Avatar
#16 ChinookArch
January 04 2012, 12:41PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

Bourque has trouble playing with intensity and emotion from game to game. I hope plays like this don't creep further into his game when he tries to add heart into his performance. This is a truly selfish and stupid play, which deserves a lengthy suspension. I defended him (moderately) for the Seabrook hit because I thought it was a little heavy and he's not normally a dirty player. I may need to re-think this now.

Solution: trade this player. He still has value and should fetch a good return at the deadline. It would rid the team of an inconsistent and frustrating player.

Avatar
#17 RexLibris
January 04 2012, 12:58PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props
Kent Wilson wrote:

The instigator rule never stopped plays like this in the past. It just meant a couple guys would fight about it afterwards.

While I'm not necessarily a fan of the instigator rule, I agree that removing it wouldn't have prevented Bourque, or anyone else, from doing this. It only means that teams start stockpiling the proverbial "nuclear deterrents".

All I can think when I see Bourque do this is "what the hell was he thinking?" I understand the idea of being fired up for a game and not liking your opponent, but to chicken-wing a guy in this situation against a team you hardly ever see and have very little history against just seems like such a brain-cramp that if he weren't suspended I'd expect the coach to sit him down for awhile.

It makes as much sense as a 6'6" Sutton leaving his feet to hit a 6'4" Ponikarovsky.

Avatar
#18 Super_Gio
January 04 2012, 02:14PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

throw the book at him

Avatar
#19 MC Hockey
January 04 2012, 02:14PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props
icedawg_42 wrote:

Man - that guy needs to wake up! There's NOTHING more frustrating than sitting on the bench at a critical time of the game, and seeing one of "the usual suspects" take a dumb needless penalty. With Bork, it's every game, he'll take a stick infraction 200 feet from his goalie, when the game is on the line. This one, I think the elbow is pretty obvious....intent or no intent, he's upright as tall as he can be, with his elbow up. Brace yourself Bork, long weekend ahead for you!

Agree 100% icedawg. I wish we could trade Bourque based on inconsistent efforts, bad penalties, bad attitude, etc. But the long-term but reasonable salary may scare away teams (as well as the inconsistency). Hey Toronto - how about Kulemin for him?

Avatar
#20 MC Hockey
January 04 2012, 02:16PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props
ville de champignons wrote:

Borkie just wants an extended time for "personal maintenance issues" and Sutter apparently said 'no'. Problem solved.

You are joking but may be right ville. He may have personal issues like Sean Avery or even Theoren Fleury (with no offense to either player) so perhaps the time off will help.

Avatar
#21 MC Hockey
January 04 2012, 02:19PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

One more idea, on jetsnation.ca Scott Taylor has suggested that Jets may want to consider trading Byfuglien. I would take him for Bourque and use as a forward! He can be, as Buffalo announcer Rick Generet says...."scary good".

Avatar
#22 jeremywilhelm
January 04 2012, 02:23PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

We need some defensive help bad. Its the Flames achilles heel by far. Bourque for a top 4 dman would be nice. Or a top 4 prospect looking to break in. There are alot more out there than you would think.

Avatar
#23 RKD
January 04 2012, 03:03PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

Right from TSN:

Bourque was more nebulous about his hit on Backstrom. Bourque was suspended two games last month for a hit on Brent Seabrook of the Chicago Blackhawks, and this one could lead to more time off the ice.

"Did it look really bad? Was he hurt? I didn't even know if I clipped him," Bourque said. "I didn't even know if I hit him in the head."

This guy is totally clueless, living in another reality. I don't think he even cares if he gets suspended or traded.

So he's on pace for another 27 goal season, but big whoop if the Flames miss the post season. In fact, he's on pace for 15-20 points less. He was a minus 17 last season.

Avatar
#24 RexLibris
January 04 2012, 03:26PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props
MC Hockey wrote:

One more idea, on jetsnation.ca Scott Taylor has suggested that Jets may want to consider trading Byfuglien. I would take him for Bourque and use as a forward! He can be, as Buffalo announcer Rick Generet says...."scary good".

Byfuglien for Bourque and.....?

Avatar
#25 Franko J
January 04 2012, 04:03PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

Has Bourque taken over for Stajan as the most disliked Flame {whipping boy}? By reading all the blogging going on here I would think he is. Too bad, I really felt that when he played against Calgary as a Blackhawk, he stood out. Ever since Langkow was injured his play has declined. Another player who looked good somewhere else and comes to this team and plays poorly. Trading Bourque would be good thing right now or at the deadline.

Avatar
#26 RexLibris
January 04 2012, 04:32PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

Okay, so here is what you do: get Peter Chiarelli REALLY drunk (as in MASH-drunk) and convince him that you've got an R. Bourque to trade and let his inebriated mind make the mistake. Then trade him for Dougie Hamilton and a first round pick. Get the papers signed and registered with the NHL quickly before anyone can file a grievance and you're laughing.

Avatar
#27 negrilcowboy
January 04 2012, 04:45PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

borg definitely is not a mensa member, has to be the dumbest of the dumb. and to think a couple of seasons ago i stated that borgs contract was an anchor.

Avatar
#28 RexLibris
January 04 2012, 04:55PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

@negrilcowboy

You could still argue that the contract is an anchor. Just now it is overboard and wrapped around somebody's neck.

Avatar
#29 amaninvan
January 04 2012, 05:03PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

Bourque will likely get the max 5 games a phone hearing mandates. Word out of Abbotsford has Raitis Ivanans on a plane to Boston.

Avatar
#30 Franko J
January 04 2012, 05:12PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

@ Rex Librus

Maybe Feaster can convince a few more GM's to go on a retreat in the mountains, get them drunk, have some incriminating pictures. Then we can have some lopsided trades in our favor for once. Only to dream.

Avatar
#31 xis10ce
January 04 2012, 05:45PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

its official, Bork gets 5

http://www.nhl.com/ice/news.htm?id=609943

Avatar
#32 MC Hockey
January 04 2012, 06:18PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props
xis10ce wrote:

its official, Bork gets 5

http://www.nhl.com/ice/news.htm?id=609943

Geez, that sucks but deserved! Hope this is a REAL wake-up call for him.

Avatar
#33 MC Hockey
January 04 2012, 06:20PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props
RexLibris wrote:

Byfuglien for Bourque and.....?

Just straight up brother. Seems fair to me. Both have great potential but one takes too many risks playing D (Buff) and should move to forward. Meanwhile the other guy(Bourque) has the inconsistency issues, and similar to Dion (High and Wide) Phaneuf, he may NEED a trade to wake him up and realize how lucky he is to make many times the average person for playing a game!

Avatar
#34 SmellOfVictory
January 04 2012, 09:20PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

Byfuglien is, for whatever reason, way more effective on D than at forward. He's not a defensive stalwart, but the amount of shots he directs at the opposing net more than cover up for any defensive liability he brings.

Avatar
#35 John F
January 04 2012, 10:18PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props
Franko J wrote:

Has Bourque taken over for Stajan as the most disliked Flame {whipping boy}? By reading all the blogging going on here I would think he is. Too bad, I really felt that when he played against Calgary as a Blackhawk, he stood out. Ever since Langkow was injured his play has declined. Another player who looked good somewhere else and comes to this team and plays poorly. Trading Bourque would be good thing right now or at the deadline.

You must have seen his best games then as his best years whave clearly been as a Flame. In 3 seasons with the Hawks he scored 16,7 and 10 goals and played 3rd/4th line in mostly pre Kane/Toews era. In spite of his fall off as a player he was a solid force for the Flames for a time. He has the ability to be a top power forward but seems to lack motivation. Probably a change of scenery might do it for him, unfortunately the 2 recent suspensions can't help his marketability.

Comments are closed for this article.