• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

8 Neutral

About vwnuck

  • Rank
    Comets Prospect

Contact Methods

  • ICQ

Profile Information

  • Gender
  1. i am guess to start off with, will be a $25000 fine, and i would guess a 5 games. or $50000 and no games...
  2. well i think another village has lost there idiot... seriously though. for anyone who actually watches the canucks, they would know that you don't.. you complaints are baseless, lack fact... and i am pretty sure your just trolling...anyway..
  3. this...
  4. I've got Gloria!!

  5. holy crap this debate is still going on? man can't we just enjoy the victory over the hawks? both ehrhoff and bieksa have there positives and negatives, but like them or not they are apart of this team until july 1 then its up to mg...... so just take the good with the bad and live with it until our season is over... this is getting really old.
  6. your like a horse dressed in a man suit!!

    1. Two one one
    2. Newsflash


      yeah, it's pretty big

  7. Not true. He was asked to play as specific role. He was not asked to change his game. Nice play on words by the way. With no salo and a lack of good right handed d men. Bieksa was the obvious choice for shut down role. Ehrhoff was not even a choice he is terrible in his own end.
  8. I would expect elder and salo as a pair and ballard and ehrhoff And bieksa and hamhuis would remain a pair. That would be my first choice. But we will see how and if/when salo ever returns
  9. I loved how bieksa as he skated past the detroit bench says to holmstrom " just drop the gloves once ". Loved it
  10. Hahahahahahahah. And his face when he crushed it!!!! Hahah
  11. I thought he played a really solid game last night. Loved how he dumped no show Joe!! He had a couple of nice hip checks. His play has been real good this year since he had atalk with management and focused on a specific role for him. Let's keep the streak going boys!!!
  12. ya that is what i thought to he looked like he just fell over but on a second look you see a stick come down on the back of his back skate should have been a penalty but ya.. you can't see it in real time there was no way the refs would have caught that one...
  13. its amazing isn't it... now he has no balance... all you have to do is push a guys back skate and it will through them off balance but if all there weight is on that skate they will go down.. no matter how big they are.. or if you are transferring weight from one skate to the other and it get hack you will go down..
  14. i thought you said you had played hockey.?.. i was all ways taught when i guys tries to carry the puck behind the net you angle them off until they run out of ice which was what bieksa was doing...you don't let a guy skate untouched back out from behind the net... that is back hockey.. bieksa played it right.. he was just burned by a good player...but the fact of the matter is regardless of bieksa missing the hit... the man in front should have been covered.... actually it was hamhuis that let his check go which he should not have, even if bieksa had mantained postion and let stamkos walk back out front the man in front should have been covered... even avoiding the hit stamkos still was not in a scoring position. thus the pass. by being behind the net bieksa still could have got back into position to stop stamkos from driving the net.. but the fact that there was a wide open man in front.. you can try to blame him all you want, you can justify it all you want by saying the guy was not open until he avoided the hit... the guy was open from the blue line...bieksa actually played it right but got beat... which happens in hockey as you know that is why most games don't end up being 0-0.