Speaking of Embellishing!

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

    Re: Speaking of Embellishing!

    In response to Fletcher1's comment:

    In response to BadHabitude's comment:

     

    True, that is absolutely NOT facedown, he is clearly reaching far to his left to attempt to poke check the puck.  If he were 'face down' how could he know where to poke check?  all he would be seeing is ice and not the puck on Zibenajad's stick.

    And just use common sense, think of whenever you dove for anything in any sport - you focus on the object you are diving for.

    This is a simple case.  Goalie dove for a puck and got a minor dent by his own defenseman.




    It's funny, this was the one thing stevegm and I agreed on.  From page 3...

    Re: Speaking of Embellishing!

    posted at 2/6/2014 9:16 AM EST

    • stevegm
    • Posts: 1831
    • First: 8/17/2012
    • Last: 2/11/2014

    Anyway, regarding the point about his "head barely moving".  At the point of impact, Bishop is sprawled, face down. 



    No it isn't fletch.  We agree he got dinged in the punkin too.  We agree it probably hurt, and we agree we have no idea how much.  We agree we don't know any details, and we agree the trainers, "may' have held him out of the rest of the game.  Mainly, I only disagreed with your assertion he was trying to draw a penalty.  That did, and still seems incredibly illogical.  The other point I disagreed with, is the notion that his head should have moved violently at the point of impact. The rationale being his face was down, and already in close proximity to where it would stop after any violent impact anyway.  Since those two points were critical in creating the hall of fame embellishment theory, it struck me as being very flimsy logic from which to base an alternative belief.

    That's not me telling the world what to think, or what to believe in.  That's just me sayin, don't be too quick to jump on someone elses bandwagon.   

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from BadHabitude. Show BadHabitude's posts

    Re: Speaking of Embellishing!

    Fletch, whatever you and Steve agree to has nothing to do with my posts.

    There's only one way that Bishop tries to sell this as a goalie interference call and that is if he knows he received contact from an opposing player.

    If he dives in the direction of Zibanejad that leaves only one player who can make contact with him - his own defenseman.

    And this was only 1:49 into the game, it wasn't like Bishop was stinking the joint out and desperate to get a goal called back, it wasn't like there was a whole night of uncalled interference before this and Bishop is thinking maybe a make up call will come his way.

    This is what it is at face value.

    Also Bishop goes down at least 3 seconds before the goal is scored and never moves, it's not as if he recognizes that a goal is imminent.

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

    Re: Speaking of Embellishing!

    In response to adkbeesfan's comment:


    what better way to express "it's nothing personal at all", than "he started it". priceless



    Ya fanned again adk.  When trying to pigeon hole someone as an illogical dope, it's incredibly counter productive to introduce a statement that lends zero support to the intended premise.

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

    Re: Speaking of Embellishing!

    In response to adkbeesfan's comment:

     



    what better way to express "it's nothing personal at all", than "he started it". priceless



    He has these episodes a couple of times a year, escalating a normal discussion into all of this nonsense, stalking, insults, anger, frantic lenthy disorganized posts on top of each other, etc.  But the good news is he'll eventually stop, say he's just having fun, and get back to being normal.  I just want to skip to the normal part.  Usually a very good poster.

 
  • You have chosen to ignore posts from adkbeesfan. Show adkbeesfan's posts

    Re: Speaking of Embellishing!

    i didn't try anything, you contradicted yourself quite well, all on your own.      

     
  • You have chosen to ignore posts from stevegm. Show stevegm's posts

    Re: Speaking of Embellishing!

      

    [/QUOTE]

    Okay, I admit. I was the second gunman on the grassy knoll.

    [/QUOTE]

    Hey..that's a great one Kel.  Allow me to join in the fun.  No ones ever said it's impossible, nobody jumped up and said it couldn't happen, but generally the grassy knoll theory lacks much credible backup to support it's claims.  nas's theory on Bishop is pretty much the same as the grassy knoll theory.  In nass's defense, he didn't introduce it as fact, but merely a topic to debate.  Everybody took their turn trying to come up with logic to support one side or the other.

    Generally, society expects a pretty "hard case' before they jump aboard something.  Those most intent on posting here late in the going, are suggesting a totally different way of seeing things though.  They say if you don't  agree with the grassy knoll theory(because we absolutely don't know for certain), you're being intolerant, and you're telling the world what they should believe.

    I find that fascinating.

     

     
  • You have chosen to ignore posts from JWensink. Show JWensink's posts

    Re: Speaking of Embellishing!

    This is why the olympics are a bad idea

     

    "go eat a dick"

     

    Have to say that made laugh out loud for a while

     
  • You have chosen to ignore posts from BadHabitude. Show BadHabitude's posts

    Re: Speaking of Embellishing!

    Another aspect of this, let's look at the player's history.

    If anything Bishop seems to be a pretty straight up player, we're not talking about Subban here.

    He could have played this up, but did not:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PATiIHnggGc

     

    Here Bishop goes after Prust

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qYFEcsNlDck

     

     

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

    Re: Speaking of Embellishing!

    In response to stevegm's comment:

     


    Hey..that's a great one Kel.  Allow me to join in the fun.  No ones ever said it's impossible, nobody jumped up and said it couldn't happen, but generally the grassy knoll theory lacks much credible backup to support it's claims.  nas's theory on Bishop is pretty much the same as the grassy knoll theory.  In nass's defense, he didn't introduce it as fact, but merely a topic to debate.  Everybody took their turn trying to come up with logic to support one side or the other.

    Generally, society expects a pretty "hard case' before they jump aboard something.  Those most intent on posting here late in the going, are suggesting a totally different way of seeing things though.  They say if you don't  agree with the grassy knoll theory(because we absolutely don't know for certain), you're being intolerant, and you're telling the world what they should believe.

    I find that fascinating.

     



    Oh my Goodness...

    Just a complete mess of distorted logic and false equivalences

    steve...you gotta stop at some point...it's getting bad...

    I'll apologize for whatever set you off to begin with.  I'm sorry.  I was wrong.

    Good enough?

     
  • You have chosen to ignore posts from stevegm. Show stevegm's posts

    Re: Speaking of Embellishing!

    In response to Fletcher1's comment:

    In response to adkbeesfan's comment:

     



    what better way to express "it's nothing personal at all", than "he started it". priceless



    He has these episodes a couple of times a year, escalating a normal discussion into all of this nonsense, stalking, insults, anger, frantic lenthy disorganized posts on top of each other, etc.  But the good news is he'll eventually stop, say he's just having fun, and get back to being normal.  I just want to skip to the normal part.  Usually a very good poster.



    Another example of "grasping" fletch.  Your latest contribution of nothing but condescending hot air.  Not one concrete thought.  Now that you have the emotional support of adk and shupe, you seem to have caught your second wind.  Why not use that to debate instead of demean?  You just picked out about 7 area's of supposed personal failings on my end, and you don't even have to leave this thread to validate them.  Why not do that?  One example of each will be a good start.  BTW, I'm thinking "frantic, lengthy, disorganized posts on top of each other" could be broken down into 2 categories, and we also can give "etc', it's own heading.

    Will that work for you?

  •  
  • You have chosen to ignore posts from stevegm. Show stevegm's posts

    Re: Speaking of Embellishing!

    In response to Fletcher1's comment:

    In response to stevegm's comment:

     


    Hey..that's a great one Kel.  Allow me to join in the fun.  No ones ever said it's impossible, nobody jumped up and said it couldn't happen, but generally the grassy knoll theory lacks much credible backup to support it's claims.  nas's theory on Bishop is pretty much the same as the grassy knoll theory.  In nass's defense, he didn't introduce it as fact, but merely a topic to debate.  Everybody took their turn trying to come up with logic to support one side or the other.

    Generally, society expects a pretty "hard case' before they jump aboard something.  Those most intent on posting here late in the going, are suggesting a totally different way of seeing things though.  They say if you don't  agree with the grassy knoll theory(because we absolutely don't know for certain), you're being intolerant, and you're telling the world what they should believe.

    I find that fascinating.

     



    Oh my Goodness...

    Just a complete mess of distorted logic and false equivalences

    steve...you gotta stop at some point...it's getting bad...

    I'll apologize for whatever set you off to begin with.  I'm sorry.  I was wrong.

    Good enough?



    More literary diahirria(spelling?)  Don't you ever feel obligated to back up any of these wild accusations?

     
  • Sections
    Shortcuts

    Share