Jump to content
The Official Site of the Vancouver Canucks
Canucks Community

Baggins

Members
  • Content Count

    10,643
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    8

Baggins last won the day on June 8 2017

Baggins had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

10,299 Gaming the system

1 Follower

About Baggins

  • Rank
    Canucks Franchise Player
  • Birthday June 1

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Burnaby BC Canada
  • Interests
    Hockey

Recent Profile Visitors

14,699 profile views
  1. How about sticking to one thing. Raymond actually instigated the contact and momentum carried them into the boards. There was no "attack" there. Purely looking through Canuck colored glasses. "What about" doesn't make something right. Otherwise you can justify anything and everything that happens. How about sticking to one incident and right or wrong. Did Rome violate the rules and injure a player? A simple yes or no is all that's needed.
  2. Would you say a Canuck player had it coming if the roles were reversed? If not it's homerism. Therein lies the problem for me. To me wrong is wrong no matter which side does it. You don't like getting manhandled you drop the gloves and take care of business. You don't sucker punch a player, or in this case sucker elbow, EVER. It's cowardly. There's no justifying a sucker punch. That's reality.
  3. Where did I say that Deb? Try harder to actually rationalize what I'm saying.
  4. He was roughing Bure up with contact but isn't that what good checkers do? Particularly in the playoffs. Burrows and Kesler both played hard and dished out extra digs and whacks and were hated around the league as "dirty players". They're the players you love on your team and hate on other teams. Welcome to hockey.
  5. The league standard for sufficient reaction time to change the course you're on is 5/10 of a second. Rome during his 8/10 actually changed course to make the hit whereas the league .5 is sufficient time to change an already chosen path. It doesn't matter that he hit chest first, and I did say it would have been a perfectly legal hit if timely, what matters is how late it was and that he actually changed direction to do it when he had more than enough time not to do so. He had the time to make a better decision is what it came down to. I don't understand how anybody could defend it. Rome chose
  6. Neither is a player without the puck not even looking in your direction. Dirty plays are dirty plays, but all dirty plays are not created equal. You have to be able to actually review them to be able to fairly judge them. For example Rome's cheap shot was dirty. Bure's elbow was dirty. Rome wasn't actually headhunting and if more timely would have been perfectly legal. What made it dirty was the fact that it was late and he had the time not to do it. Bure's on the other hand was pure dirt and illegal no matter how you cut it. So Bure's was the dirtier of the two. This can be seen in the video
  7. You're creating your own story here. I did call it dirty. That's exactly what a cheap shot is. But are all cheap shots equal in severity? Was it a bump, or was it vicious? The two are not equal. Bure's elbow is pretty easy to judge through the video evidence. It was dirty and vicious. The hit on Linden while down I can't judge as there is no video to see exactly what occurred. That's not the same as defending it at all. I simply can't judge it any further than calling it cheap or dirty without seeing it. As I stated earlier headhunting will generally be at the top of the dirty spectrum for me.
  8. So now I'm a troll? Headhunting is excusable.... as long as it's done by a Canuck.... All Robson said was "he hit Linden again" which I acknowledged. I also referred to it as a cheap shot (I'm such a troll). But is a cheap shot worse than than headhunting? Without seeing it I can't judge it. The initial hit on Linden, although a cheap shot, wasn't worse than direct intentional headhunting regardless of who the target is. The second hit on Linden can't be judged without the video. Read the quote in my sig. It's why I will take video evidence over fan percept
  9. I don't care Deb. There's so many die hard homers I'll only take the word of video replay. You'll believe in what you want, particularly with the pro-Canuck viewpoint as you're a self professed homer. Homers loved the Churla elbow, I don't fall in that category. I hate that type of play regardless of player or team. I've cheered for the Canucks since joining the league but won't defend dirty.
  10. Dirty absolutely. But without seeing it tough to judge. For all we know it could have been little more than a bump. Straight up headhunting an unsuspecting player is pretty easy to judge though. I think you're downplaying how dirty Bure's elbow was and I'd wager you'd be leading the lynch mob if that elbow was on any Canuck.
  11. I disagree. Was Churla "actively playing hockey" by simply being on the ice without the puck? Well the same would apply to Linden then. Churla had no more reason than Linden to expect a cheap shot away from the play. Both were dirty opportunistic plays on unsuspecting players and neither led to suspension. I would say Bure's was worse as his was pure intentional headhunting on an unsuspecting player. Linden's initial injury was from a full on body check away from the play. A body check that would have been perfectly legal had he had the puck. The Messier hit while Linden was down was never see
  12. The problem with Woodley's comment is it isn't even a rumor or hearsay but is being construed as such. It says "he doesn't believe" meaning it's pure opinion rather than something from an actual inside source. Otherwise he would say he was told this by an "inside source". People have a tendency to skip the "in my opinion" and "I believe" when these guys say things and take it as true inside information rather than pure speculation. His belief likely has more to do with his opinion of Holtby than anything factual.
  13. I loved at the end when Petey says, "I don't even know the Swedish songs."
  14. Well that seals the deal. No way he opts out if he has to pay his bonus back.
  15. The problem with concussions imo is early you can see signs a person is concussed but as healing progresses the medical staff depend a great deal on the player being honest about how he's feeling.
×
×
  • Create New...