Canucks Have No Balls

Welcome to the main forum of our site. Anything and everything to do with the Vancouver Canucks is dicussed and debated here.

Moderator: Referees

Re: Canucks Have No Balls

Postby Strangelove » Sat Oct 15, 2011 3:27 pm

darren wrote:
Strangelove wrote:And I distinctly remember Marcus going public with his request for protection.

I believe it was before Steve Moore took him out.


And he got it. That sure helped, didn't it?


Nope, Nazzy didn't receive what he was asking for.

And why was he asking for protection??

Maybe Marcus Naslund knows more about hockey than you do? Just a thought.
____
The Ring Leader
User avatar
Strangelove
CC Legend
 
Posts: 7541
Joined: Sat Dec 18, 2004 1:13 pm

Re: Canucks Have No Balls

Postby dhabums » Sat Oct 15, 2011 3:32 pm

darren wrote:I claim: The only people who needed to see a "response" to the Methot hit were .... the fans, for emotional reasons that have nothing to do with anything that would actually affect the outcome of the game. If the Sedins were going to get run out of the league from hard hitting, it would have happened by now.


If taking it to the extreme is the way to make your point then I do not know what to say. I guess I'll just do the same: Wayne Gretzky insisted McSorley be included in the deal to LA. True story? Maybe. Do you think Marchand tries that garbage on 99?

I'd like to see the Sedins have as much room as humanly possibly with as little wear and tear on them throughout the season. That way, for once, fans are not excusing their failures due to injury. This is not about saving their lives.
User avatar
dhabums
CC Hall of Fan Member
 
Posts: 1291
Joined: Sun Jul 10, 2011 7:55 pm

Re: Canucks Have No Balls

Postby Potatoe1 » Sat Oct 15, 2011 4:03 pm

dhabums wrote:
If taking it to the extreme is the way to make your point then I do not know what to say. I guess I'll just do the same: Wayne Gretzky insisted McSorley be included in the deal to LA. True story? Maybe. Do you think Marchand tries that garbage on 99?



Ahh now I get it, you guys all think it's 1988.

:wink:
Potatoe1
CC Hall of Fan Member
 
Posts: 1613
Joined: Wed Sep 21, 2011 1:06 pm

Re: Canucks Have No Balls

Postby Potatoe1 » Sat Oct 15, 2011 4:25 pm

ClamRussel wrote:
darren wrote:. Eager didn't even get a penalty on the play if I remember correctly.




Uhh like most on the current "toughness which hunt" you don't remember correctly.

With the Sharks only down by a goal, Ben Eager totally loses his shit over Bieksa beating up Marleau. He takes 4 minor penalties in just over a period.

The canucks then score 4 straight embarrassing the Sharks and putting them down 2-zip in the series.

Eager doesn't play another game in the series and the Sharks make zero attempt to re-sign him in the summer.

He sure showed us though....

No way is Bieksa going to beat up Marleau again :lol:
Potatoe1
CC Hall of Fan Member
 
Posts: 1613
Joined: Wed Sep 21, 2011 1:06 pm

Re: Canucks Have No Balls

Postby dhabums » Sat Oct 15, 2011 4:58 pm

Potatoe1 wrote:
dhabums wrote:
If taking it to the extreme is the way to make your point then I do not know what to say. I guess I'll just do the same: Wayne Gretzky insisted McSorley be included in the deal to LA. True story? Maybe. Do you think Marchand tries that garbage on 99?



Ahh now I get it, you guys all think it's 1988.

:wink:


Haven't you seen what the kids are wearing?
User avatar
dhabums
CC Hall of Fan Member
 
Posts: 1291
Joined: Sun Jul 10, 2011 7:55 pm

Re: Canucks Have No Balls

Postby dhabums » Sat Oct 15, 2011 5:01 pm

ClamRussel wrote:Case in point. Disgusting display by Asham results in NO instigator, no unsportsmanlike conduct.


Off topic, but kudos to Beagle for not going down after that first big shot.
User avatar
dhabums
CC Hall of Fan Member
 
Posts: 1291
Joined: Sun Jul 10, 2011 7:55 pm

Re: Canucks Have No Balls

Postby Island Nucklehead » Sat Oct 15, 2011 6:42 pm

Potatoe1 wrote:
Uhh like most on the current "toughness which hunt" you don't remember correctly.

With the Sharks only down by a goal, Ben Eager totally loses his shit over Bieksa beating up Marleau. He takes 4 minor penalties in just over a period.

The canucks then score 4 straight embarrassing the Sharks and putting them down 2-zip in the series.

Eager doesn't play another game in the series and the Sharks make zero attempt to re-sign him in the summer.

He sure showed us though....

No way is Bieksa going to beat up Marleau again :lol:


Eager just as easily could have ended Daniel Sedin's playoffs with the hit he layed on him.
User avatar
Island Nucklehead
CC Legend
 
Posts: 4254
Joined: Wed Sep 07, 2005 2:27 pm

Re: Canucks Have No Balls

Postby porp » Sat Oct 15, 2011 7:17 pm

He also points out that when he went cuckoo-for-coco-puffs a couple of years ago and attacked Chicago Blackhawk Dave Bolland in the playoffs, he was universally criticized for losing composure. His retaliation was reported as proof that Sedin, by “not sticking to his game,” had been outwitted and outplayed.


The Sedins can't seem throw off criticism.

However, I think it was more that Daniel was ineffectual in his retaliation. I was more pissed that he didn't do a Bure/Churla http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=enN_nN-KTqI (0.45').

As an aside, even Don Cherry called the Bure hit cheap - the youtube I linked to is a cdc fluff piece interviewing Gino. Just about every other youtube post of that hit is extremely critical of Bure... with the exception of Cherry who (from a rock'em sock'em vid?) actually gave the background on how Churla had been targeting Bure.

Seriously, the twins need to learn how to surreptitiously stick out their elbows a big more or give the other guy an extra shove after they've both (checker and a Sedin) gone down after a hit. Maybe a slew foot too, for good measure, and a glove in the face.

They say that they can take a hit, but I think that doing some full-contact sparring mui thai/Brazilian Jiu Jitsu (and sparring back) with getting punched or kicked in the head and giving back as good as they get could really help their NHL game.

They've shown that they have incredible leg and back strength; they should be able to punch. They've clearly shown that it's not they can't but it's that they don't know how. They also look like they're intimidated by being punched. The only way to cure that is to get punched in the head a bunch and learn how to stop that by punching (or whatever) back effectively enough to make it stop.

Grar, it's really frustrating watching them aspire for the Lady Bing when they should be focusing on Conn Smythe.
User avatar
porp
CC Veteran
 
Posts: 181
Joined: Thu Jul 14, 2011 10:15 am

Re: Canucks Have No Balls

Postby Potatoe1 » Sat Oct 15, 2011 7:54 pm

Island Nucklehead wrote:Eager just as easily could have ended Daniel Sedin's playoffs with the hit he layed on him.



And the point is what?
Potatoe1
CC Hall of Fan Member
 
Posts: 1613
Joined: Wed Sep 21, 2011 1:06 pm

Re: Canucks Have No Balls

Postby Island Nucklehead » Sat Oct 15, 2011 8:04 pm

Potatoe1 wrote:
Island Nucklehead wrote:Eager just as easily could have ended Daniel Sedin's playoffs with the hit he layed on him.



And the point is what?


The guy ran around like an idiot for the rest of that game. Dangerously. Nobody stood up to him. It's nice our PP worked so well against San Jose, but when that dries up you have to be able to adapt your game. You have to have the tools to adapt. Against the Bruins, when our PP went into the tank and guys were taking liberties, we had no response. That's the point. You don't have to fight fire with fire all the time, but you have to have some kind of spark.
User avatar
Island Nucklehead
CC Legend
 
Posts: 4254
Joined: Wed Sep 07, 2005 2:27 pm

Re: Canucks Have No Balls

Postby ClamRussel » Sat Oct 15, 2011 10:47 pm

Potatoe1 wrote:
ClamRussel wrote:
darren wrote:. Eager didn't even get a penalty on the play if I remember correctly.




Uhh like most on the current "toughness which hunt" you don't remember correctly.

With the Sharks only down by a goal, Ben Eager totally loses his shit over Bieksa beating up Marleau. He takes 4 minor penalties in just over a period.

The canucks then score 4 straight embarrassing the Sharks and putting them down 2-zip in the series.

Eager doesn't play another game in the series and the Sharks make zero attempt to re-sign him in the summer.

He sure showed us though....

No way is Bieksa going to beat up Marleau again :lol:


Uhh I was referring specifically to the hit from behind on Daniel.
Thanks for the misguided sarcasm though. :roll:
"Once a King, always a King"
-Mike Murphy
User avatar
ClamRussel
CC Legend
 
Posts: 3831
Joined: Tue Oct 05, 2004 10:50 am
Location: New South Wales, Australia

Re: Canucks Have No Balls

Postby Potatoe1 » Sat Oct 15, 2011 10:55 pm

ClamRussel wrote: Eager didn't even get a penalty on the play if I remember correctly.



ClamRussel wrote:Uhh I was referring specifically to the hit from behind on Daniel.
Thanks for the misguided sarcasm though. :roll:



Uhh the hit was a penalty......
Last edited by Potatoe1 on Sat Oct 15, 2011 11:08 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Potatoe1
CC Hall of Fan Member
 
Posts: 1613
Joined: Wed Sep 21, 2011 1:06 pm

Re: Canucks Have No Balls

Postby Potatoe1 » Sat Oct 15, 2011 10:59 pm

Island Nucklehead wrote:
Potatoe1 wrote:
Island Nucklehead wrote:Eager just as easily could have ended Daniel Sedin's playoffs with the hit he layed on him.



And the point is what?


The guy ran around like an idiot for the rest of that game. Dangerously. Nobody stood up to him. It's nice our PP worked so well against San Jose, but when that dries up you have to be able to adapt your game. You have to have the tools to adapt. Against the Bruins, when our PP went into the tank and guys were taking liberties, we had no response. That's the point. You don't have to fight fire with fire all the time, but you have to have some kind of spark.



So we blew them out in the game and the series....

Whats the problem?

You saying Bieksa should take it easy on marleau next time?
Potatoe1
CC Hall of Fan Member
 
Posts: 1613
Joined: Wed Sep 21, 2011 1:06 pm

Re: Canucks Have No Balls

Postby Benjo » Sat Oct 15, 2011 11:37 pm

porp wrote:
Seriously, the twins need to learn how to surreptitiously stick out their elbows a big more or give the other guy an extra shove after they've both (checker and a Sedin) gone down after a hit. Maybe a slew foot too, for good measure, and a glove in the face.



Don't they take enough hooking penalties without adding elbowing, roughing and tripping penalties? They have tried to stand their ground in the past and it blew up in their faces.
Benjo
CC 1st Team All-Star
 
Posts: 683
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2011 9:39 pm

Re: Canucks Have No Balls

Postby Blob Mckenzie » Sun Oct 16, 2011 2:38 am

I think EPC got it right. Just send a fucking e mail if people want to continue taking liberties with this team . An angry email to the perpetrator telling him this shit won't be tolerated anymore .

Maybe the fans could be encouraged to wear pink at games and hold up signs displaying our stance against bullying.
Tell me how my ass tastes.
User avatar
Blob Mckenzie
CC Legend
 
Posts: 3132
Joined: Wed Aug 11, 2004 12:34 pm
Location: Oakalla

PreviousNext

Return to Canucks Corner Chat

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Baidu [Spider], Bing [Bot] and 2 guests