Another Hockey Fight, another wussy ending

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from TheExaminer. Show TheExaminer's posts

    Re: Another Hockey Fight, another wussy ending

    I hate to see ANY Boston team lose to someone called the "Jets".
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from Chef09. Show Chef09's posts

    Re: Another Hockey Fight, another wussy ending

    In Response to Re: Another Hockey Fight, another wussy ending:
    [QUOTE]Whether or not to eliminate fighting from the NHL - like almost everything else related to the 'product' - is not the players' call to make. Fighting will be eliminated when the Board Of Governors become convinced by the avalanche of science and sentiment, that protecting their players' safety is analagous with economic prosperity. When they make fighting in hockey an ejectable offence they will grow the game bigger and faster than any other gimmick - shootouts, re-allignment etc - they could try. Their only regret will be that they didn't do it sooner - not because they'd have saved more young mens' brains - because they'll be making way more money.
    Posted by gord11[/QUOTE]
    I have friends and relatives that believe as you do that fighting isn't allowed in other sports that are just as rough as hockey- I say go watch them. I'm not embarrassed by fighting in hockey no matter what someone from New Zealand feels about it, really.Go watch rugby or whatever without the fighting. Hockey is different. I like nice passing plays that result in goals but when a cheap shot results in a reckoning and a fight I'm okay with that. I don't feel sorry for guys with limited skills getting a crack at the big time and some big bucks. If they're willing to take the risk -let them. People may come to the conclusion that hockey and football are too dangerous to play and they outlaw those types of contact sports altogether.A sad day that will be. Until then Gord- go watch Euro-hockey on big ice. No hits ,no fights just lots of stick work . Have at it boy
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from gord11. Show gord11's posts

    Re: Another Hockey Fight, another wussy ending

    Ok, Not-A-Shot,  As you requested I rattled off a few reasons why I think fighting in hockey is a lie.
    Whatta you got?
    Why isn't fighting in hockey a lie? Why is fighting in hockey not a lie? What does it do?

    And dezaruchi, I read Bettman's quotes - pretty shocking stuff - Big Tobacco and their company lawyers did the same tapdance for as long as they could, saying the same kind of things; "you can't link our product with cancer, people can get cancer form a lot of different places etc". In the end they couldn't run from the truth and the law suits keep mounting to this day. It'll be the lawsuits that get Bettman in the end and force the necessary changes.
    In fact, it's his bulldog Daly in the last paragraph who leaves the door open to change on this subject. These are smart guys, they know change is coming.

    And dezaruchi, on the subject, I'm not sure what your agenda is. You come yapping hard at me with all the usual stuff; "if you don't like it go blah blah blah' and 'if you watched the game...'. But this isn't about me. As more players/atheletes dedicate their brains to science, things are going to get ugly. You have to know that? And The NHL Player's Union, if they have any fangs at all by then - because they certainly don't now, as the upcoming CBArmageddon will undoubtably again uncover - The NHLPA will certainly have something to say about it and should.

    Then, it'll be me watching the fast and beautiful game I love, uninterrupted by facsimiles of the worst aspects humanity has to offer and me posting here to you - because you'll surely be here, racing each other to a million posts, you and your grampa-sadist buddies, wistfully pining for the good old days of senseless brutality and brain damage for your pleasure - it'll be me saying; "if you don't like it, why don't you go watch something else, like bull-fighting or chimpanzee bio-medical research."
     
  4. This post has been removed.

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from Fletcher1. Show Fletcher1's posts

    Re: Another Hockey Fight, another wussy ending

    Gord you must love soccer, with all of the diving, faking of injuries, theatrics, etc.  I love how physical confrontation is never a part of that game and everything is so pure that every possible scenario is put in the refs hands.  You must love it.  When the players of both teams pretend to be injured at the same time and gasp at the refs, arms outstretched for a call...it's just so honest.

    You know compared to a sport where the competition can be settled between the players, instead of just by whomever is better at fooling the refs.

    If you don't like fierce competition that is sometimes violent, no big deal, try another sport.

    Hockey is more honest.  That's why I love it.
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from Fletcher1. Show Fletcher1's posts

    Re: Another Hockey Fight, another wussy ending

    In regards to the Marchand fight, I think dez is right that we'd all love to see Stan Jonathan or O'Reilly types where the refs have to peel you off before you let up.  But realistically, I get that guys reach a point after 30 seconds of wailing on eachother, where they are tired, the anger is fading, the knuckles are bleeding and they're satisfied to break it up.  I don't begrudge them for that.  They're not all going to be Campbell vs. Vitale, but as long as they're not totally staged goon dances, I won't complain.
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from gord11. Show gord11's posts

    Re: Another Hockey Fight, another wussy ending

    Yup. soccer, basketball, hockey, lacrosse, curling, football, volleyball, skiing,  etc etc
    Love em all.
    I wasn't aware i needed to choose one to the exclusion of all others.

    You ever play real soccer, Fletcher1? It's a hard-nosed game. Plus, I figure more than a billion people, worldwide can't be wrong.
    But you, Fletcher1, you figure soccer needs to introduce fighting? That two men -or women - should stand mid-pitch in the World Cup and have a fistfight? That's what soccer/football lacks? Fighting would make it more honest? Honest, like the  NHL is where there is no diving and no 'playing' to the Referee?

    What other dishonest sports need to introduce fistfighting?
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from DrCC. Show DrCC's posts

    Re: Another Hockey Fight, another wussy ending

    A guy has a career where he gets punched in the head 100 times.  He also takes 100 hard checks that knock him down so that he hits his head on the ice.
    Which causes the brain damage?

    That is (part of) Bettman's contention - it may be that guys that have never been in a fight would show similar brain damage, simply from playing the game.  You need a basis for comparison before you can make definitive statements.
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from gord11. Show gord11's posts

    Re: Another Hockey Fight, another wussy ending

    DrCC, see, that's just it, the basis of comparison is coming, the data is only going to grow and Bettman knows it. There is a reckoning ahead for all big-contact sports.

    And regardless of where the CTE-inducing blows to the brain come from (though I think in Derek Boogaard's case most could surmise) Bettman and his non-stance on fighting will be among the first things to come into stark relief.

    The rational outside world will look increasingly at all contact sports and see eliminating fighting in the NHL as a no-brainer (pun intended), it will see eliminating the bare-knuckled concussive punches thrown in a hockey fight as one of the logical first steps in reducing the number of brain damaged athletes.
       In other words - fighting in the NHL will be one of the first things to go. As a lawyer, Bettman realizes when the time comes - and indeed as the time comes - he will be very hard-pressed to make a cogent case for keeping fighting in the game. None of the reasons, nor excuses, nor 'codes' so oft spouted around here nor around the rinks will suffice, nor frankly would they make any sense to any impartial judge. Bettman knows all this. I know they are already preparing for that day of reckoning. They'd be truly foolish if they weren't

    When looking for culprits in the willful brain-damaging of young and old athletes, the NHL and it's 95 year-old, '5 for Fighting' penalty will go quietly. Bettman will have no choice
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from adkbeesfan. Show adkbeesfan's posts

    Re: Another Hockey Fight, another wussy ending

    In Response to Re: Another Hockey Fight, another wussy ending:
    [QUOTE]Yup. soccer, basketball, hockey, lacrosse, curling, football, volleyball, skiing,  etc etc Love em all. I wasn't aware i needed to choose one to the exclusion of all others. You ever play real soccer, Fletcher1? It's a hard-nosed game. Plus, I figure more than a billion people, worldwide can't be wrong. But you, Fletcher1, you figure soccer needs to introduce fighting? That two men -or women - should stand mid-pitch in the World Cup and have a fistfight? That's what soccer/football lacks? Fighting would make it more honest? Honest, like the  NHL is where there is no diving and no 'playing' to the Referee? What other dishonest sports need to introduce fistfighting?
    Posted by gord11[/QUOTE]
    listen gandhi... if you don't like fighting because you don't like fighting, watch another sport. if you don't like fighting because of the possible long-term effects, we have a problem. 10X more concussions happen because of on ice colisions(legal and illegal). should hockey become a non-contact sport? it would not be the same game. life has risks, some live riskier lives than others. the point is... they are choosing to live that way- there is no one being forced to put themselves in dangers way. and hey, they get compensated quite nicely for it.
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from DrCC. Show DrCC's posts

    Re: Another Hockey Fight, another wussy ending

    Of course he's leaving room for open - he's a lawyer.  I'm glad you know for certain what data will show in the future.

    Until there is actual data to show that fighting in hockey causes anything more than noise in the brain damage the players receive, your point lacks any bite at all.
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from Fletcher1. Show Fletcher1's posts

    Re: Another Hockey Fight, another wussy ending

    In Response to Re: Another Hockey Fight, another wussy ending:
    [QUOTE]Yup. soccer, basketball, hockey, lacrosse, curling, football, volleyball, skiing,  etc etc Love em all. I wasn't aware i needed to choose one to the exclusion of all others. You ever play real soccer, Fletcher1? It's a hard-nosed game. Plus, I figure more than a billion people, worldwide can't be wrong. But you, Fletcher1, you figure soccer needs to introduce fighting? That two men -or women - should stand mid-pitch in the World Cup and have a fistfight? That's what soccer/football lacks? Fighting would make it more honest? Honest, like the  NHL is where there is no diving and no 'playing' to the Referee? What other dishonest sports need to introduce fistfighting?
    Posted by gord11[/QUOTE]

    Well, you either didn't read, or possibly, didn't understand what I wrote.  Nobody said you had to choose sports, it just sounds like you would enjoy a sport that is more controlled by the officials.  I played soccer in high school, I liked it.  I like that level better than professional though.  No need to introduce fighting into other sports (did I suggest that?).  I like that sports are different.  I don't need them to all be the same.

    But there is range in sports where on one ened you can have officials control everything (soccer, basketball) and every sequence of the game relates to fouls, whistles, and rules.  On the other end of the spectrum you have some sports where true physical competition and confrontation between the players is allowed to help shape the game and the officials don't interfere with every part of that competition.  I prefer competition that preserves, to a degree, a purer form of 'battle' in sport where some codes of conduct are left to the players to shape what is acceptable.  You see fist fights in hockey as a barbaric and unnecessary thing.  I'm not even a huge fan of fighting, but I look at the absurd level taunting, celebrations, faking fouls, faking injuries, and general reliance on the referee in other sports as something that is totally unappealing to me.  On some level, fighting, or fear of it, prevents that garbage.  Let them compete, and if that competition sometimes boils over (within reason), I like it better than red cards and ejections for shoving someone.  I like to watch emotion, passion and physical confrontation and you can have all that in hockey without an injury rate that is any higher than other sports.

    I'm okay with the fighting in hockey, you aren't.  You're okay with the diving, faking injuries, constant whistles, and theatrics of soccer, I'm not.  Perhaps we should just watch the sports we like, eh?  I still watch soccer sometimes...
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from gord11. Show gord11's posts

    Re: Another Hockey Fight, another wussy ending

    Nope, not a non-contact sport. Just a fighting-eguals-ejection one.
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from adkbeesfan. Show adkbeesfan's posts

    Re: Another Hockey Fight, another wussy ending

    In Response to Re: Another Hockey Fight, another wussy ending:
    [QUOTE]Of course he's leaving room for open - he's a lawyer.  I'm glad you know for certain what data will show in the future. Until there is actual data to show that fighting in hockey causes anything more than noise in the brain damage the players receive, your point lacks any bite at all.
    Posted by DrCC[/QUOTE]
    and who are we to argue with a dr.?
     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from gord11. Show gord11's posts

    Re: Another Hockey Fight, another wussy ending

    ridiculous leaps Fletcher1, sorry, but ridiculous. You're not applying your keen powers of perception to NHL hockey. Your middle paragraph is pure irrefutable empirical garbage.
    NHL hockey is one of the most over-officiated sports there is. The rules never stop. The Referees influence is over-bearing at best. And the League just keeps the rules coming.

    You said you like hockey because it is more 'honest'. You gave me every impression that that 'honesty' is created and upheld by fighting. Then, again you said you like hockey because "some codes of conduct are left to the players to shape what is acceptable."
    If other sports aren't as honest as you'd like, then shouldn't I deduce that you would have fighting in them to keep the 'referee-ing' down? To keep the game..'honest'?

    Fighting in hockey, violence - as in life - to solve problems, to mete out justice, to 'keep people honest' is an absurd notion and worse, it doesn't work.
     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from BsLegion. Show BsLegion's posts

    Re: Another Hockey Fight, another wussy ending

    In Response to Re: Another Hockey Fight, another wussy ending:
    [QUOTE]A guy has a career where he gets punched in the head 100 times.  He also takes 100 hard checks that knock him down so that he hits his head on the ice. Which causes the brain damage? That is (part of) Bettman's contention - it may be that guys that have never been in a fight would show similar brain damage, simply from playing the game.  You need a basis for comparison before you can make definitive statements.
    Posted by DrCC[/QUOTE]

    Exactly !  but gord fails to acknowledge this .   All he is reading is what the lobbyist that want fighting gone in the game of hockey have to say. 
    I think if a player gets struck by a puck in the leg they blame it on fighting.
     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from gord11. Show gord11's posts

    Re: Another Hockey Fight, another wussy ending

    Wrong, BsLegion, wrong and willfully dense.
    Besides, DrCC, unwittingly has already acknowledged what I'm saying; that if you eliminate fighting, there would be 100 fewer shots to the head.
     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from gord11. Show gord11's posts

    Re: Another Hockey Fight, another wussy ending

    It's really simple; Would there be fewer concussions, less brain damage, if a stiffer* penalty for fighting was imposed? (*players ejected, suspended and/or fined)

     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from Not-A-Shot. Show Not-A-Shot's posts

    Re: Another Hockey Fight, another wussy ending

    In Response to Re: Another Hockey Fight, another wussy ending:
    [QUOTE]In regards to the Marchand fight, I think dez is right that we'd all love to see Stan Jonathan or O'Reilly types where the refs have to peel you off before you let up.  But realistically, I get that guys reach a point after 30 seconds of wailing on eachother, where they are tired, the anger is fading, the knuckles are bleeding and they're satisfied to break it up.  I don't begrudge them for that.  They're not all going to be Campbell vs. Vitale, but as long as they're not totally staged goon dances, I won't complain.
    Posted by Fletcher1[/QUOTE]

    Hey, great point of view, Fletch.

    I retract my earlier statement and agree with this.
     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from dezaruchi. Show dezaruchi's posts

    Re: Another Hockey Fight, another wussy ending

    In Response to Re: Another Hockey Fight, another wussy ending:
    [QUOTE]Ok, Not-A-Shot,  As you requested I rattled off a few reasons why I think fighting in hockey is a lie. Whatta you got? Why isn't fighting in hockey a lie? Why is fighting in hockey not a lie? What does it do? And dezaruchi, I read Bettman's quotes - pretty shocking stuff - Big Tobacco and their company lawyers did the same tapdance for as long as they could, saying the same kind of things; "you can't link our product with cancer, people can get cancer form a lot of different places etc". In the end they couldn't run from the truth and the law suits keep mounting to this day. It'll be the lawsuits that get Bettman in the end and force the necessary changes. In fact, it's his bulldog Daly in the last paragraph who leaves the door open to change on this subject. These are smart guys, they know change is coming. And dezaruchi, on the subject, I'm not sure what your agenda is. You come yapping hard at me with all the usual stuff; "if you don't like it go blah blah blah' and 'if you watched the game...'. But this isn't about me. As more players/atheletes dedicate their brains to science, things are going to get ugly. You have to know that? And The NHL Player's Union, if they have any fangs at all by then - because they certainly don't now, as the upcoming CBArmageddon will undoubtably again uncover - The NHLPA will certainly have something to say about it and should. Then, it'll be me watching the fast and beautiful game I love, uninterrupted by facsimiles of the worst aspects humanity has to offer and me posting here to you - because you'll surely be here, racing each other to a million posts, you and your grampa-sadist buddies, wistfully pining for the good old days of senseless brutality and brain damage for your pleasure - it'll be me saying; "if you don't like it, why don't you go watch something else, like bull-fighting or chimpanzee bio-medical research."
    Posted by gord11[/QUOTE]
    What fighting related lawsuit was ever filed? Another typical fact-free post with nothing but your personal beliefs to back it up.
    What's my agenda? I don't have one. Why would you ask. I'm not the one who's trying to persuade others to agree with my opinion. Myself and others have simply chosen to disagree with you. That's it. You, on the other hand, can't stop trying to tell others that their opinions are wrong just because they don't match up with yours.This thread you've decided to hijack was in relation to a particular fight that myself and others had an opinion on. Once again, I can't help but notice your disdain for posters with high post counts. The answer to this problem is the same answer to the "problem" of fighting in the NHL. Stay away if you don't like it. Nobody's making you read this forum or watch the NHL. Maybe I and other NHL fans who enjoy the odd fight are neanderthals. I won't apologize for being one of the fans who pays NHL players salaries just as you don't feel the need to apologize for being a pompous know-it-all that needs to force your opinion on others to feel fulfilled. Good luck with that.
    BTW, what's with the "big tobacco" reference? Am I to assume that smokes are illegal where you live. If not, then your analogy is as worthless as the rest of your posts. For future reference, around here, facts win debates more often than hurt feelings. You seem to be confused about how it works.
     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from 49-North. Show 49-North's posts

    Re: Another Hockey Fight, another wussy ending

    Despite the flying insults, the topic, and the discussion, is an important one. 

    It's interesting that recent research (I can't cite the study right now, but if needed, I can seek out the reference) has shown that CTE does not necessarily occur from a small number of significant concussions, but can also occur as a result of long-term exposure to smaller head impacts which, individually, do not result in observable concussion-like symptoms.  These studies examined athletes such as football linemen, who may experience a non-concussing head collision dozens of times per game, without displaying symptoms.  The cumulative effect, however, combined with one or two severe concussions during a playing career, can be enough to bring on CTE.

    It's possible that hockey fights, combined with the dozens of non-concussing hits which a player experiences, can cause, over the course of a career, CTE to occur in the brains of hockey players.

    The role of the NHLPA will be interesting.  Will they place a higher value on the long-term brain health of its members (assuming that the causal link above is established), or will they be more concerned that many of its members' jobs will be threatened by crackdowns on fighting?  Though, in reality, roster spots by players whose primary role is fighting will be replaced by more (likely smaller in stature) "skill" players, so the total number of union members will be unchanged.  That's usually the key issue for a union.
     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from dezaruchi. Show dezaruchi's posts

    Re: Another Hockey Fight, another wussy ending

    In Response to Re: Another Hockey Fight, another wussy ending:
    [QUOTE]Despite the flying insults, the topic, and the discussion, is an important one.  It's interesting that recent research (I can't cite the study right now, but if needed, I can seek out the reference) has shown that CTE does not necessarily occur from a small number of significant concussions, but can also occur as a result of long-term exposure to smaller head impacts which, individually, do not result in observable concussion-like symptoms.  These studies examined athletes such as football linemen, who may experience a non-concussing head collision dozens of times per game, without displaying symptoms.  The cumulative effect, however, combined with one or two severe concussions during a playing career, can be enough to bring on CTE. It's possible that hockey fights, combined with the dozens of non-concussing hits which a player experiences, can cause, over the course of a career, CTE to occur in the brains of hockey players. The role of the NHLPA will be interesting.  Will they place a higher value on the long-term brain health of its members (assuming that the causal link above is established), or will they be more concerned that many of its members' jobs will be threatened by crackdowns on fighting?  Though, in reality, roster spots by players whose primary role is fighting will be replaced by more (likely smaller in stature) "skill" players, so the total number of union members will be unchanged.  That's usually the key issue for a union.
    Posted by 49-North[/QUOTE]
    Are you referring to the same studies which showed long term exposure to soccer did more damage than hockey? The question is solely about lost jobs. It's about the game the players want to play and safety as a result. Do you remember hearing about concussions in the 70's and 80's when a dirty hit was quickly dealt with by a punch in the face? 20 out of 20 players polled said they want fighting to remain in the game. Who are we to tell them they're wrong?
     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from Macfact. Show Macfact's posts

    Re: Another Hockey Fight, another wussy ending

    Head injuries are a real concern for to me and I have expressed my opinions about the cheap head shots with verocity and think this has been handled to lightly. But like many of the old timers in the game I believe removing fighting actually intensifies this problem. This is not ballet school it is hockey and you will never remove the essence of the game. It is intense, close quarter warefare. It is the proudest game I know above any I know. The pride for one's club and passion inherently creates a friction that belongs in the game. If you take away the only outlet to express frustration and returning the game to nomarlcy in a good fight than you have stripped the game and opened pandora's box which you will never close. The head shots, the stick work, the cheapness, the pettiness seen in soccer, and the theatrical diving will be the norm you will see every night and if you have not seen in it creep in to the game from all the crack downs you are not watching hockey. The equipment more and more being used as weapons as fighting becomes a theatric between two gladitors not a team responsiblity as it should have remained. You have then been hit in the face one to many times yourself. Allow the players to police this game and they will do so. Interfere and the nasty part of the game will rears its evil head and that is what your are seeing now. Neely and Milbury are right as soon as you go to mandatory face masks this game will be castrated. Trust me the kind of hockey some of you want is called feild hokcey and you are welcome to put on a skirt and watch it. I am all for protecting the players to every extent and punishing to the fullest extent cheap nasty hits but really look at the game the more you try to regulate it the worse it gets.
     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from islamorada. Show islamorada's posts

    Re: Another Hockey Fight, another wussy ending

    Came back to read the Gordo insight only to find he resorted not to any type of capitualation on his stance, but slipped into an example of godwin's law on online discussions.  BsLegion does not have CTE, and he is not dim witted.  Now if you play a sport that has spearing, butt ending, cross checking, and is played at a higher speed than even soccer then you must relize the sport is not comparable to others.  I am sure Polo is very dangerous too, but spare me!  

    Now Gordo, I am pleased to read your rationalization of why fighting is not warranted in the NHL, primarily as linked to the recent findings.  The fact remains Stan Johnatan, Terry O'rRielly, Gordy Howe, Ted Ferguson all are very much alive and well!  So limiting a study to a few cases like Derek Boogaard is not a large sampling study!  North may actually used a quote that the long view is necessary to make any definitive judgement on whether or not fighting is the sole cause of CTE.  Lastly NAS (long standing poster here) says it best "skating clowns" hockey should be elimintated, it is boring and pointless. Yet banning all fighting needs more expansive study if linking it to CTE.  
     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from gord11. Show gord11's posts

    Re: Another Hockey Fight, another wussy ending

    You spent all day on that one, dezaruchi?

    Wow. I'm getting the impression that you don't read. You skim and reply. But you are right about one thing; I am confused. By you. I don't quite know how to untangle your post - it is, literally a bunch of gobbledy-guck - So insecure, so emotional, so protective, so all-over-the-place, talking more about my apparent affront to the sacred integrity of 'the thread' etc (hint: it is always a tell when a guy hides, overly behind procedure and policy.)
    I'm keeping it pretty real, pretty clear. I don't think the NHL will be able to operate forever without a comprehensive and preventative policy toward headshots and concussions resulting from fistfights on the ice. Science, the march of time and common sense will demand it. It's just my opinion, i don't remember giving a sh*t if i swayed anyone to that opinion, i don't remember caring if I was agreed with - frankly, i didn't expect it.

    Sorry, dezaruchi, but if this is important to you - and I think it is - with posts like your last one, it is obvious to everyone that - agree or disagree with what I'm saying - my debate with you has already been won.
    Or at least it's obvious to everyone, that if I lost this debate, it wasn't to you.

    Remember, dezaruchi, just because you don't understand something it doesn't mean it's un-understandable. I mean, really, you don't see the 'Big Tobacco' comparison? Anybody? A little help here...

    Anyway, it's simple. Just answer the questions and we can call it a day; Would there be fewer concussions, less brain damage in NHL hockey if fighting were penalized to the point of marginalization?
    Yes or no?

    And do you care about players becoming concussed, becoming brain damaged?

    Still waiting for your buddy 'NAS's answers to a simple question; "Why isn't fighting in hockey a lie? What does fighting do?"... cricket...cricket..
     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share