Brendan Shanahan

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

    Re: Brendan Shanahan

    You cant tell that to the pissed off morons who refuse to remove their heads from their rears.  If that was the truth, it doesnt give them something to b*tch and moan about.  It means their team actually LOST the game, instead of it being a conspiracy.
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from adkbeesfan. Show adkbeesfan's posts

    Re: Brendan Shanahan

    the only thing nucks fans should be crying about is the FACT that they were SHUT OUT AT HOME in game 7 of the stanley cup finals. period. i can't wait to go home and watch that game again. never gets old, unlike the crying from vancouver.
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from red75. Show red75's posts

    Re: Brendan Shanahan

    I think i'ts important to remember that it was the Shanahan Summit that lead to all the rule changes coming out of the lockout. Agree with him or not, he's a guy who has always had the games best interest at heart. I see no reason why he won't continue that way.
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from lambda13. Show lambda13's posts

    Re: Brendan Shanahan

    In Response to Re: Brendan Shanahan:
    [QUOTE]It would be like cheering for the Dutch at the Olympics.  How can you like that team?
    Posted by shuperman[/QUOTE]

    Because I'm Dutch... :(

    But I think this is very positive. And to what North was saying, I can see what he meant. He meant that there will no longer be that ridiculous "Oh well my son plays for that team so I won't pass judgement on them and I'll let some one else handle it" shenanigans that we had to endure. How many times did the NHL get called out for allowing him to be Head of Discipline when his son plays for one of the teams. There was just NO fair way of having him judge everything. It gives him a bias.

    As far as Shanahan having played with most of the players I see that as much less of a conflict of interest. For that matter it would be nearly impossible to employ anyone to a job that governs the entire league without there being some sort of minor conflict whether it be a distant relative, favorite player, favorite team, etc. Its just always going to be there and someone will always find something to pick on.
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from 49-North. Show 49-North's posts

    Re: Brendan Shanahan

    If you check my posts here, at no point did I say that Campbell was acting in a conflict of interest situation.  I merely stated that the perception of conflict is of paramount importance in any judicial situation. 

    In order to retain credibility, there can be no doubt about the objectivity of the ruling body.  And as long as Campbell was the one approving the decisions, or was part of the office making the decisions, the perception was clouded.

    Would Shanahan have made the same decisions as Campbell/Murphy?  We'll never know.  What I do know is that Shanny is being far more explanatory, forthright and transparent in his decision making than Campbell/Murphy ever were.
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from Ronstar8. Show Ronstar8's posts

    Re: Brendan Shanahan

    To whining losers that simply cannot swallow the pill of losing in a game 7 of the SCF, there was never any "perception" of conflict of interest when Campbell was playing for the Panthers.

    Odd...!
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from shuperman. Show shuperman's posts

    Re: Brendan Shanahan

    In Response to Re: Brendan Shanahan:
    [QUOTE]If you check my posts here, at no point did I say that Campbell was acting in a conflict of interest situation.  I merely stated that the perception of conflict is of paramount importance in any judicial situation.  In order to retain credibility, there can be no doubt about the objectivity of the ruling body.  And as long as Campbell was the one approving the decisions, or was part of the office making the decisions, the perception was clouded. Would Shanahan have made the same decisions as Campbell/Murphy?  We'll never know.  What I do know is that Shanny is being far more explanatory, forthright and transparent in his decision making than Campbell/Murphy ever were.
    Posted by 49-North[/QUOTE]

    Well its easy to rise to the top when at rock bottom.  The league was a joke in re: to league rulings.  Glad Shanny is at the helm
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from shuperman. Show shuperman's posts

    Re: Brendan Shanahan

    Just saw Shanny video re: Staubitz.  Man Shanny is aging quickly. 
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from 50belowzero. Show 50belowzero's posts

    Re: Brendan Shanahan

    In Response to Re: Brendan Shanahan:
    [QUOTE]To whining losers that simply cannot swallow the pill of losing in a game 7 of the SCF, there was never any "perception" of conflict of interest when Campbell was playing for the Panthers. Odd...!
    Posted by Ronstar8[/QUOTE]
    So true.
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from OatesCam. Show OatesCam's posts

    Re: Brendan Shanahan

    8 Game suspension of James Wisniewski, and a video of Shanny explaining why.  I really like it.  Glad the Bruins didn't sign wiz, I think he's a jerk.  Hated that hit to the head of DK last year, within the rules or not it was dirty.

     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from user_3957105. Show user_3957105's posts

    Re: Brendan Shanahan

    In Response to Re: Brendan Shanahan:
    [QUOTE]8 Game suspension of James Wisniewski, and a video of Shanny explaining why.  I really like it.  Glad the Bruins didn't sign wiz, I think he's a jerk.  Hated that hit to the head of DK last year, within the rules or not it was dirty.
    Posted by OatesCam[/QUOTE]

    His headshot on the chicago D (I believe it was Seabrook) a couple of years back was especially vile. He took a flying-elbow run at Brent from the blueline. Overpaid and overrated.....
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from SanDogBrewin. Show SanDogBrewin's posts

    Re: Brendan Shanahan

    In Response to Re: Brendan Shanahan:[QUOTE]In Response to Re: Brendan Shanahan : If he was involved in the finals and couldnt rule on either side how was he involved?  He likely was involved in the process but I thought I read somewhere that he was taken out of the finals.  Obviously I could be wrong and as you know San I dont always read thoroughly. :-) Posted by shuperman[/QUOTE]

    Greg was involved, Colin was not...
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from bigvig. Show bigvig's posts

    Re: Brendan Shanahan

    Dont try to tell the anti-Bruins group that.  All hell will break loose.
     

Share