Ad blocker detected: Our website is made possible by displaying online advertisements to our visitors. Please consider supporting us by disabling your ad blocker on our website.
sagebrush wrote:Differences in opinion between CBC commentators were interesting, during the game against Austria.
In the second period, Healy said the Norway game was a tougher test, since there was only one NHL player on the Austrian team.
In the third period, Hughson said there were three NHL forwards on the Austrian team, & noted how solid Luongo was in the game.
Healy is dumber than a sack of hammers.
While I think most are reading too much into the media's comments, it is funny to note they have completely lost track of the easy going Strombone1 that they fell head over heels in love for last year.
It all reeks of trying to manufacture a storey where there quite simply isn't one. So much for reporters reporting the news. The medium is the message.
Over the Internet, you can pretend to be anyone or anything.
I'm amazed that so many people choose to be complete twats.
I can't understand why so many people are so media driven? I give a shit what they're sayin' and the evidence is clear:
Price let in a goal helping by weak rebound control and Roberto not...shutout or better shutup.
"Every dog has its day." - CC Hockey Pool Champion 2004 & 2013 'Moves like Lenarduzzi'
Price played very well this tournament and was deserving of his shut outs. But quite honestly anyone could have played in net for Canada and won. This was perhaps the best defensive display, and most consistent, we have seen. Canada would have won the gold no matter what goaltender they started. Not taking anything away from Price, he played very well and is deserving of that recognition.
Well that's basically why I felt Lu should have been given the ball to run with. With 6 straight Olympic victories, the gold medal & the way he played in his start...he earned it. If he stumbled then it should have gone to Price. No one can argue w/ Price's performance, he was solid. All thing's being equal the tie should have gone to the runner is all. Guaranteed they could have won w/ Smith in net. Goaltending for Canada wasn't a difference maker (despite what TSN says), it was our blueline!
It might be fun to keep a tally of how many times we hear someone say "Luongo lost the number 1 spot to Price". Since he did nothing to lose the spot, it was obviously a coaches decision to go with Price early on. Of course, some in the media and plenty non-media will pretend that Luongo had the #1 billing and lost the confidence of the coaches while Price was there to save the day.
I just want to put this out there now rather than after it starts happening to show how predictable this game is.
Rayxor wrote:It might be fun to keep a tally of how many times we hear someone say "Luongo lost the number 1 spot to Price". Since he did nothing to lose the spot, it was obviously a coaches decision to go with Price early on. Of course, some in the media and plenty non-media will pretend that Luongo had the #1 billing and lost the confidence of the coaches while Price was there to save the day.
I just want to put this out there now rather than after it starts happening to show how predictable this game is.
I noted Luongo's difficulty with rebounds during his one game.
Over the Internet, you can pretend to be anyone or anything.
I'm amazed that so many people choose to be complete twats.
To me this decision was a toss up. My preference going into it was Lu, but felt both goalies would give us about the same chance of winning...so either way.
Most likely, Canada would have won with any of the 3 in net.
Considering Canada won gold, and shut out the USA and Sweden in the final 2 games to do it...it's pretty clear Babcock made the right decision.
KeyserSoze wrote:Considering Canada won gold, and shut out the USA and Sweden in the final 2 games to do it...it's pretty clear Babcock made the right decision.
Actually, it proves nothing. Yes, Price played very well, and he seems like a good guy, so I'm happy for him, but it really doesn't allow us to conclude anything.
Per wrote:Well...... I basically agree, the blue line was more important than the goalie, but didn't you beat the US 1-0 in the semifinal?
One mistake by the goalie and the game goes to ot. Two mistakes and you lose.
Credit where credit is due. Price held the fort and did not allow a single goal in the two most important games of the tournament.
That's a brilliant record and not worthy of a "anyone could have done it" comment.
I didn't say anyone could have done it, my point was there wasn't a clear no. 1 and the 3 goalies we had there would have won imo. Mike Smith is a very good goalie as well, he's not just "anyone." Price's record was very good indeed but look at Luongo's in Olympic play. It's an embarrassment of riches & a good problem to have.