No Surprise - Canucks Crying Over Lucic

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from 49-North. Show 49-North's posts

    Re: No Surprise - Canucks Crying Over Lucic

    Simply amazing.  I say that Looch should have been suspended.  Not a minority opinion amongst NHL observers, even GMs, and dez feels the need to compare me, who has a business degree, and is the Executive Director of a non-profit with a budget over $600,000 to a mentally disabled person.

    Just because I don't agree with the blind faith that you guys have in your precious, never-do-wrong Bruins. 

    I must say that I admire the devotion of the Bruins fanbase.  I suspect that you guys would also applaud the efforts of those at Penn State who rioted when Joe P. was fired.

    Blind faith precludes objective thinking.  If that's "too political" for you, then so be it.
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from LUCICmilan17. Show LUCICmilan17's posts

    Re: No Surprise - Canucks Crying Over Lucic

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from LUCICmilan17. Show LUCICmilan17's posts

    Re: No Surprise - Canucks Crying Over Lucic

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from LUCICmilan17. Show LUCICmilan17's posts

    Re: No Surprise - Canucks Crying Over Lucic

    as said by the awsome guys over at Days of Y'Orr
    Nice sticking your shoulder out miller
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from LUCICmilan17. Show LUCICmilan17's posts

    Re: No Surprise - Canucks Crying Over Lucic

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from kelvana33. Show kelvana33's posts

    Re: No Surprise - Canucks Crying Over Lucic

    This thread has taken on a life of it's own. Love the pics.
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from Fletcher1. Show Fletcher1's posts

    Re: No Surprise - Canucks Crying Over Lucic

    Several people here have supported a suspension for Lucic and received nothing but regular debate from others here.  That opinion doesn't bother me at all, even though I think it is wrong.

    49, you have been given such a hard time here because:

    1.  Your motivated anti-Bruins song and dance is tired.  We all know what your predictable, self-serving opinion will be on every Bruin-related issue.
    2. When people disagree with you, you insist that they are biased and you are objective, despite that fact that you puppet whatever Vancouver fans are told to think.  You are not objective.  Some others here are not either, but some are.
    3. You talk politics, and you do so in such a trite, cliched way that it is obvious you are just trying to provoke people.  This is a hockey forum.
    4. You are now bragging about your job and some compnay operating budget, or something.  Nobody cares.  This is a hockey forum.
    5. You're now piggybacking on the molested kids from Penn St. to take a shot at the people here, and apparently Americans in general.  Sad.  Child molestration happens where you are too and it is just as sad.  This is a hockey forum.
    6. You over value yourself.  You have always had the tone of someone who thinks they such be lauded for showing up on this forum.  You're just another voice to me, not even a very interesting one recently.
    7. You think this forum is made up of groupthinkers.  The people here can't agree on the sky being blue.  Everything is argued here.  Nobody agrees on anything.  The unity of the board in dismissing your recent posts should tell you more about you than us.

    Clear enough?
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from blydon75. Show blydon75's posts

    Re: No Surprise - Canucks Crying Over Lucic

    No 49, we do not applaud rioting, or even participate, we leave up to cry-baby Vancouver fans who like to destroy their own city after their team embarasses themselves. Also, to say people who disagree with you must "applaud" anything that has gone on at Penn St is unbelievably tastelss and disgusting.  You continue to embarass yourself and the entire Canuck fan base.

    In Response to Re: No Surprise - Canucks Crying Over Lucic:
    [QUOTE]Simply amazing.  I say that Looch should have been suspended.  Not a minority opinion amongst NHL observers, even GMs, and dez feels the need to compare me, who has a business degree, and is the Executive Director of a non-profit with a budget over $600,000 to a mentally disabled person. Just because I don't agree with the blind faith that you guys have in your precious, never-do-wrong Bruins.  I must say that I admire the devotion of the Bruins fanbase.  I suspect that you guys would also applaud the efforts of those at Penn State who rioted when Joe P. was fired. Blind faith precludes objective thinking.  If that's "too political" for you, then so be it.
    Posted by 49-North[/QUOTE]
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from Trigger11. Show Trigger11's posts

    Re: No Surprise - Canucks Crying Over Lucic

    In Response to Re: No Surprise - Canucks Crying Over Lucic:
    [QUOTE]Perhaps, in time, some of you will realize that Lucic was in the wrong, and that an effort to protect goalies is not a bad thing, and does not show weakness.
    Posted by 49-North[/QUOTE]

    I don't think people are saying he was right, nor has anyone, besides Burrows, said that goalies are fair game. The debate is whether or not it was a suspension-worthy act, and the league decided it was not. Miller put himself in that position and in the split-second decision Lucic had to make, he honestly risks a season-ending injury if he tries to stop. I blew my ACL trying to stop from hitting another player who came recklessly at a puck. It was a no-checking league, although we did "lite" checking, bit I was trying to avoid running over a smaller player. I missed the last 3 games of the regular season, but played in the playoffs with a very tightly-strapped knee brace as I awaited surgery, figuring I couldn't do any more damage. We were the #1 seed and the only sport I hadn't  won in was hockey, so I really wanted that trophy. We finished second, losing the championship game as 4 goals were scored in the final minute, 2 by each team (one by me to initially tie it). 
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from Trigger11. Show Trigger11's posts

    Re: No Surprise - Canucks Crying Over Lucic

    In Response to Re: No Surprise - Canucks Crying Over Lucic:
    [QUOTE]as said by the awsome guys over at Days of Y'Orr Nice sticking your shoulder out miller
    Posted by LUCICmilan17[/QUOTE]

    YES, HE DID! But I am sure 49North will claim you doctored the video, eh!
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from lambda13. Show lambda13's posts

    Re: No Surprise - Canucks Crying Over Lucic

    It's a conspriacy I tell you! They are all out to get meh!

    *Please excuse the sarcasm.
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from kelvana33. Show kelvana33's posts

    Re: No Surprise - Canucks Crying Over Lucic

    In Response to Re: No Surprise - Canucks Crying Over Lucic:
    [QUOTE]Several people here have supported a suspension for Lucic and received nothing but regular debate from others here.  That opinion doesn't bother me at all, even though I think it is wrong. 49, you have been given such a hard time here because: 1.  Your motivated anti-Bruins song and dance is tired.  We all know what your predictable, self-serving opinion will be on every Bruin-related issue. 2. When people disagree with you, you insist that they are biased and you are objective, despite that fact that you puppet whatever Vancouver fans are told to think.  You are not objective.  Some others here are not either, but some are. 3. You talk politics, and you do so in such a trite, cliched way that it is obvious you are just trying to provoke people.  This is a hockey forum. 4. You are now bragging about your job and some compnay operating budget, or something.  Nobody cares.  This is a hockey forum. 5. You're now piggybacking on the molested kids from Penn St. to take a shot at the people here, and apparently Americans in general.  Sad.  Child molestration happens where you are too and it is just as sad.  This is a hockey forum. 6. You over value yourself.  You have always had the tone of someone who thinks they such be lauded for showing up on this forum.  You're just another voice to me, not even a very interesting one recently. 7. You think this forum is made up of groupthinkers.  The people here can't agree on the sky being blue.  Everything is argued here.  Nobody agrees on anything.  The unity of the board in dismissing your recent posts should tell you more about you than us. Clear enough?
    Posted by Fletcher1[/QUOTE]

    Wrong. I think we can all agree this was said perfectly.
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from 49-North. Show 49-North's posts

    Re: No Surprise - Canucks Crying Over Lucic

    In Response to Re: No Surprise - Canucks Crying Over Lucic:
    [QUOTE]Several people here have supported a suspension for Lucic and received nothing but regular debate from others here.  That opinion doesn't bother me at all, even though I think it is wrong. 49, you have been given such a hard time here because: 1.  Your motivated anti-Bruins song and dance is tired.  We all know what your predictable, self-serving opinion will be on every Bruin-related issue. 2. When people disagree with you, you insist that they are biased and you are objective, despite that fact that you puppet whatever Vancouver fans are told to think.  You are not objective.  Some others here are not either, but some are. 3. You talk politics, and you do so in such a trite, cliched way that it is obvious you are just trying to provoke people.  This is a hockey forum. 4. You are now bragging about your job and some compnay operating budget, or something.  Nobody cares.  This is a hockey forum. 5. You're now piggybacking on the molested kids from Penn St. to take a shot at the people here, and apparently Americans in general.  Sad.  Child molestration happens where you are too and it is just as sad.  This is a hockey forum. 6. You over value yourself.  You have always had the tone of someone who thinks they such be lauded for showing up on this forum.  You're just another voice to me, not even a very interesting one recently. 7. You think this forum is made up of groupthinkers.  The people here can't agree on the sky being blue.  Everything is argued here.  Nobody agrees on anything.  The unity of the board in dismissing your recent posts should tell you more about you than us. Clear enough?
    Posted by Fletcher1[/QUOTE]

    I provide a contrary opinion, because many times, that's what this forum needs.  You say that there is often disagreement on this forum -- sure, when you guys are deciding who to trade away -- but rarely on the big picture, league-wide hockey items.  I am an independent, critical thinker.  Why would I come here, otherwise.  You guys know I'm not here to pump the Bruins' tires. You guys won the Cup, fercrissakes!  I'm here to provoke thought and discussion.  What would have happened last June if Burrows had stuck his finger in Marchand's mouth? You don't think he would have bit down?? You say that Rome's hit was "dirty", but Chara's on Patches was "a hockey play"?

    Think objectively!
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from dezaruchi. Show dezaruchi's posts

    Re: No Surprise - Canucks Crying Over Lucic

    In Response to Re: No Surprise - Canucks Crying Over Lucic:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: No Surprise - Canucks Crying Over Lucic : I provide a contrary opinion, because many times, that's what this forum needs.  You say that there is often disagreement on this forum -- sure, when you guys are deciding who to trade away -- but rarely on the big picture, league-wide hockey items.  I am an independent, critical thinker.  Why would I come here, otherwise.  You guys know I'm not here to pump the Bruins' tires. You guys won the Cup, fercrissakes!  I'm here to provoke thought and discussion.  What would have happened last June if Burrows had stuck his finger in Marchand's mouth? You don't think he would have bit down?? You say that Rome's hit was "dirty", but Chara's on Patches was "a hockey play"? Think objectively!
    Posted by 49-North[/QUOTE]
    This is just like when you felt the need to tell all of us that you weren't a jerk. If what you say is true then there would be no need to say it as we'd already be aware of it. I suggest you try reading some of the posts by Kennedy, our resident Habs fan, if you'd like to see examples of someone who can be objective while still engaging in intelligent debate. He's rarely attacked by my fellow posters because he's not looking to be.........how about you? Do you figure everyone likes the fact that you come here acting like you're providing an essential service of some kind? If Kennedy never posted here again, his observations would be missed. Nobody would miss your tired attempts to show us the error of our ways.
     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from Fletcher1. Show Fletcher1's posts

    Re: No Surprise - Canucks Crying Over Lucic

    I was thinking the same as Dez when I read your post.  Kennedy (Habs) and LoveRealHockey (Leafs) are both fans of rival teams that come here regularly and are quite well respected by people.  Kennedy was one of the first to say that Chara should not be suspended for the hit on Max P.  That's objective, and it gives him the legitimacy to then argue with the people here against the Bruins on other issues.  He doesn't have the rubber stamp, predictable, self-serving opinion on every Bruin controversy.

    Everyone thinks they're objective.  I think I'm objective.  I think you are sometimes objective, but you're on the bandwagon of both the anti-Bruins crowd and the reactionary crowd that wants a suspension every time somebody gets hurt.

    We've done this before, but the difference between Chara's hit and Rome's hit come down to what specific suspendable rules were broken.  Chara hit looked awful and I held my breath when I first saw Max P down on the ice.  But what exactly was illegal?  He pinned him into the boards.  No head shot, no leaving of the feet, no charging, no blindside, no stick involved, not late, no elbow...it was interference.  Very unfortunate though, and Montreal seems to have admitted that the stancheon played a large role in the injury (they have replaced them league-wide.

    Rome's hit had the following specific offenses involved: 1) it was late. 2)the head was the principal point of contact and appeared to be targeted. 3) Rome left his feet to deliver the hit.

    That is why I, objectively, see a difference between the two hits.  The league, objectively came to the same conclusion.  There are rules against what Rome did, not what Chara did.  Remove the emotion, and judge the hits based on the rules.

    But all of the groupthinkers in Montreal and Vancouver are outraged.  Same with the Lucic hit.  That's emotion, not objectivity.
     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from 49-North. Show 49-North's posts

    Re: No Surprise - Canucks Crying Over Lucic

    OK, here's an objective question:  There has been much criticism here about the Sabres lack of response when Lucic hit Miller.  Did all the Bruins jump Rome last June when he hit Horton? No.  Why wasn't Rome immediately pounded into submission? Lucic was there, on the ice, and he did nothing.  And not a word of criticism from you guys.  Yet you jumped all over the "gutless" Sabres.
     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from kelvana33. Show kelvana33's posts

    Re: No Surprise - Canucks Crying Over Lucic

    In Response to Re: No Surprise - Canucks Crying Over Lucic:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: No Surprise - Canucks Crying Over Lucic : I provide a contrary opinion, because many times, that's what this forum needs.  You say that there is often disagreement on this forum -- sure, when you guys are deciding who to trade away -- but rarely on the big picture, league-wide hockey items.  I am an independent, critical thinker.  Why would I come here, otherwise.  You guys know I'm not here to pump the Bruins' tires. You guys won the Cup, fercrissakes!  I'm here to provoke thought and discussion.  What would have happened last June if Burrows had stuck his finger in Marchand's mouth? You don't think he would have bit down?? You say that Rome's hit was "dirty", but Chara's on Patches was "a hockey play"? Think objectively!
    Posted by 49-North[/QUOTE]

    We often disagree (see my recent threads with Dez & Shupe) here. This forum does not need the presence of an outsider to add flavor to it or to "provoke" thought. Tons of educated hockey fans here. We are capable of that on our own. Your opinion, hockey knowledge, and point of view as a Canucks fan are certainly welcome here, but don't be so darn sensitive when you encounter loyal Bruin fans who see things through their black n gold glasses.
    Examples:
    What would have happened if Burrows stuck his hand in Marchands mouth? Well from a Bruins point of view he would be at fault for the simple reason is he would have to add significant force just to get past marchands nose. Also your comparing something that actually took place to a "what if."

    Rome vs. Chara. What hit Hortons head? Romes elbow. What hit Pax's head? the stantion. Chara didn't put the stantion there.
    I don't recall one bruins fan crying how the Paille hit last year did not deserve a suspension. It was an illegal hit, not once was the color of uniform mentioned.

    Objective enough for you?
    What is it with people from Vancouver and tire pumping?
     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from kelvana33. Show kelvana33's posts

    Re: No Surprise - Canucks Crying Over Lucic

    In Response to Re: No Surprise - Canucks Crying Over Lucic:
    [QUOTE]OK, here's an objective question:  There has been much criticism here about the Sabres lack of response when Lucic hit Miller.  Did all the Bruins jump Rome last June when he hit Horton? No.  Why wasn't Rome immediately pounded into submission? Lucic was there, on the ice, and he did nothing.  And not a word of criticism from you guys.  Yet you jumped all over the "gutless" Sabres.
    Posted by 49-North[/QUOTE]

    I was there. I'm going to guess it took Rome all of 6 seconds to skate to the penalty box by himself. The ref never told him to get into the box. Everyone on the ice was looking at Horton, refs included and Rome skated to the box on his own. Lucic sakted right over to Horton since he did not see it. By the time he looked up Rome was already sitting in the box. Pretty sure that is on video. When Lucic hit Miller what did he do? Stood 3 feet away from Miller. Then he played the rest of the game without incident. Was there a retaliation? Nope. Did the Bruins have a chance to get Rome. Nope. that day is coming though.

    Whats your point. And please think objectivley.
     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from dezaruchi. Show dezaruchi's posts

    Re: No Surprise - Canucks Crying Over Lucic

    In Response to Re: No Surprise - Canucks Crying Over Lucic:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: No Surprise - Canucks Crying Over Lucic : I was there. I'm going to guess it took Rome all of 6 seconds to skate to the penalty box by himself. The ref never told him to get into the box. Everyone on the ice was looking at Horton, refs included and Rome skated to the box on his own. Lucic sakted right over to Horton since he did not see it. By the time he looked up Rome was already sitting in the box. Pretty sure that is on video. When Lucic hit Miller what did he do? Stood 3 feet away from Miller. Then he played the rest of the game without incident. Was there a retaliation? Nope. Did the Bruins have a chance to get Rome. Nope. that day is coming though. Whats your point. And please think objectivley.
    Posted by kelvana33[/QUOTE]
    Bam! Right in the kisser. Winner by TKO-Kelvana33!
     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from Chef09. Show Chef09's posts

    Re: No Surprise - Canucks Crying Over Lucic

    I understand that you guys (Dez, Kelvanna et. al.) are taking the high road here and debating 49- with objectivity and repect . .  to be commended really ,but I recognized him for what he was after the Bruins won the cup - just a higher form of troll. I don't like to throw the "T-Word" around with reckless abandon, but that's what he is. The arrogant demeanor has been there right from the beginning: enlightening us with various quips like "you guys should worry about your goal tending, Thomas can't have another season like that" etc etc. I just stopped responding to anything he said since his tactics were working- inciting anger. He's hanging around like a cold sore below the surface, waiting, hoping, yearning for the day when the the Bruins slip . . .
    I come here to get away from the typical Canuck banter since I listen to sports radio here in the Vancouver area. I can't imagine having the spare time or desperation level necessary to spend one minute on a Canuck forum.-not during the playoffs or after the B's won. Some of you may see the benefit of 49's objectivity and alternate point of view. I do not . I will however enjoy the rest of your posts about various other topics about the Bruins.
    He's Cactus Tony in a tux, nothing more.
     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from 49-North. Show 49-North's posts

    Re: No Surprise - Canucks Crying Over Lucic

    In Response to Re: No Surprise - Canucks Crying Over Lucic:
    [QUOTE]I understand that you guys (Dez, Kelvanna et. al.) are taking the high road here and debating 49- with objectivity and repect . .  to be commended really ,but I recognized him for what he was after the Bruins won the cup - just a higher form of troll. I don't like to throw the "T-Word" around with reckless abandon, but that's what he is. The arrogant demeanor has been there right from the beginning: enlightening us with various quips like "you guys should worry about your goal tending, Thomas can't have another season like that" etc etc. I just stopped responding to anything he said since his tactics were working- inciting anger. He's hanging around like a cold sore below the surface, waiting, hoping, yearning for the day when the the Bruins slip . . . I come here to get away from the typical Canuck banter since I listen to sports radio here in the Vancouver area. I can't imagine having the spare time or desperation level necessary to spend one minute on a Canuck forum.-not during the playoffs or after the B's won. Some of you may see the benefit of 49's objectivity and alternate point of view. I do not . I will however enjoy the rest of your posts about various other topics about the Bruins. He's Cactus Tony in a tux, nothing more.
    Posted by Chef09[/QUOTE]

    Hey, credit for dressing up to come chat with y'all.  I'll take it!
     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from 49-North. Show 49-North's posts

    Re: No Surprise - Canucks Crying Over Lucic

    In Response to Re: No Surprise - Canucks Crying Over Lucic:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: No Surprise - Canucks Crying Over Lucic : I was there. I'm going to guess it took Rome all of 6 seconds to skate to the penalty box by himself. The ref never told him to get into the box. Everyone on the ice was looking at Horton, refs included and Rome skated to the box on his own. Lucic sakted right over to Horton since he did not see it. By the time he looked up Rome was already sitting in the box. Pretty sure that is on video. When Lucic hit Miller what did he do? Stood 3 feet away from Miller. Then he played the rest of the game without incident. Was there a retaliation? Nope. Did the Bruins have a chance to get Rome. Nope. that day is coming though. Whats your point. And please think objectivley.
    Posted by kelvana33[/QUOTE]

    We all know that reactions to hits deemed to be "cheap" happen virtually instantaneously.  Hit occurs.  Player goes down. Two seconds later, teammate gets in the face of the 'hitter'.

    Six seconds is plenty of time to intercept Rome on the way to the box.
     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from dezaruchi. Show dezaruchi's posts

    Re: No Surprise - Canucks Crying Over Lucic

    In Response to Re: No Surprise - Canucks Crying Over Lucic:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: No Surprise - Canucks Crying Over Lucic : We all know that reactions to hits deemed to be "cheap" happen virtually instantaneously.  Hit occurs.  Player goes down. Two seconds later, teammate gets in the face of the 'hitter'. Six seconds is plenty of time to intercept Rome on the way to the box.
    Posted by 49-North[/QUOTE]
    Really............3 hours to come up with a reply and this is it? You mention Lucic specifically as having "done nothing" after the hit. Another in a long line of stupid statements made by our resident millionaire philanthropist. Amazing you can find time to post between NASA missions. Lucic is carrying the puck well ahead of the play. By the time the play is blown dead, he looks back to see his good friend and teammate in serious trouble on the ice. With medical staff coming onto the ice, your suggestion is that Lucic should've chased Rome to the penalty box? Keep the dumb comments coming. It only reaffirms what most of us already know.......you just say stuff without putting any thought into it. I mean it's either that or you really are stupid and that would fly in the face of how smart you constantly try to portray yourself to be. It's great you can fool yourself because you're fooling no one else here.
     
  24. This post has been removed.

     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from kelvana33. Show kelvana33's posts

    Re: No Surprise - Canucks Crying Over Lucic

    In Response to Re: No Surprise - Canucks Crying Over Lucic:
    [QUOTE]I have to chuckle at some B's fans here feeling guilty of a bang/bang play from Lucic and the fact it was totally clean and actually an incorrect call on the ice (charging). All of a sudden our LWer has no right to a puck, he should concede and dance around the guy coming at him, goalie or not. Okie doke.  Yup, of all the years I've played and watched hockey, all of a sudden the rules are now changed for Ryan Miller and his primadonna ego. They basically made up the call on Lucic (charging/that's not what charging is) to squash any more nasty activity from festering. Buffalo should have then fought Lucic, which they did not do.  They are trying to reinvent hockey codes and use the PC NHL as their leverage. Congrats to Shanahan for not panicking and caving in to ridiclous and embarrassing whining by some hockey people who apparently forgot about how the game is played, what's clean, what isn't, etc. About time the NHL got some calls right. They were correct in the Pacioretty and this situation here. The concept of this "crackdown" by Shanahan, which is apparently needed due to a new generation of pukes like Matt Cook and no real protection of the enforcer, should not spill over into overly sensitive pansies like Ryan Miller or anyone else. Fine line and hockey people know the line.
    Posted by RidingWithTheKing[/QUOTE]

    It was the correct call, the rule was in place long before Ryan Miller came into the NHL, and I'm almost positive his ego was not considered.  A couple of us posted the actual rule, I'm not going to get into should/could he have stopped, was there intent, should they change the rule. It's been beaten to death here. But what more proof do you need?
     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share