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

Canucks Management "NO-SHOW's" at STH/Memebers only meeting.

Rate this topic


RU SERIOUS

Recommended Posts

25 minutes ago, DrJockitch said:

Didn’t have reach deep or look hard or root around for deep meanings. It reads as a clear belittling statement directed towards Allvin and the AGMs.  In this case by using the little girl trope that has so often been used to diminish the contributions of women. The realities of a made up cartoon are hardly a debatable point. The intent was clear to belittle and diminish the group as numerous other people have noted here
Now overall I think they have done a terrible job.  But that has nothing to do with gender of the real humans or the made up chipmunks. 

You're right, its belittling, but belittling and diminishing a group of people or individuals based on their performance isn't sexist, regardless of the sex of the people. Adding the word "girls" in doesn't automatically mean that their weak performance is because they are girls. perhaps you need to view things differently and not go looking for the bad guy in everything.

Again, I ask the question. If the OP had said Allvin and the chipmunk boys, or rather lets say "Little man" Allvin and the chipmunks, would you have felt the immediate need to call that sexist against Allvin or men in general? 

Listen, I'm all for equality for women, and I absolutely whole heartedly believe a women's knowledge and experience in the field of sports business (or really anything else) can be equal to the greatest men. But I'm sorry, saying Allvin and the chipmunk girls, when in fact they are girls just isn't sexist unless you choose to put your own inferences or own spin on it that simply isnt there, which in my mind means you are perpetuating and more a part of the problem then the OP

  • Like 2
  • Cheers 1
  • Huggy Bear 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, DrJockitch said:

Didn’t have reach deep or look hard or root around for deep meanings. It reads as a clear belittling statement directed towards Allvin and the AGMs.  In this case by using the little girl trope that has so often been used to diminish the contributions of women. The realities of a made up cartoon are hardly a debatable point. The intent was clear to belittle and diminish the group as numerous other people have noted here. 
Now overall I think they have done a terrible job.  But that has nothing to do with gender of the real humans or the made up chipmunks. 

I take more offense that we do have a male AGM that clearly isn't a girl. 

 

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, PetterssonOrPeterson said:

This canucks job really just seems like a side mission for JR.

He clocked out ever since he left Pittsburgh, had his rings, and was enjoying retirement at his home in Carolina but he was intrigued by the offer that Aquilini had to go over to his house to make.

 

PA is his crony so he just follows him along.

Say what you want about the rest of the assistants but I feel like the front office was more concerned appearing woke and making headlines for a day or two rather than if they were actually qualified for the position.

I will take it as a win if JR can get the elusive practice facility figured out. 

 

Low standards. 

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I havent seen or heard anything from aqualini since the scandal that was on his plate, i usally see twittter posts by him, im shocked hes allowed this mess to conintue, its his money hes losing not JR or alvin , people need to boycott in going to games and demand change either sell all the players and get bedard or fix this mess of a def and goaltending

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Drive-By Body Pierce said:

 

 

I always imagine the positive effects of what would happen if the players and team received (at least some level of) unconditional support from across the entire fan base. Kind of like what has shown to be very effective in addiction or mental health situations. Alas, our toxic fan base and media will never let that happen, as many seem to feel the need to break others down to build themselves up.

 

 

 

I think you are missing the point here.  Unconditional support is still happening as we are still paying for tickets and going to the games.  What people are trying to get is some accountability.  Why is it that criticism is always looked at as toxic by some.  We as a group want our team to do better and continue to support the team but it is up to management to be held accountable and at least show face.  If I do poorly at my job, I am sure I will hear about it, from both my management and my clients as is their right.  The same applies here. However, right now you've taken a topic about management not showing up to not showing support to players which is a whole different context to what this thread is about. 

  • Cheers 1
  • Upvote 1
  • Vintage 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Ghostsof1915 said:

What's wrong with UBC? 

Apparently they need to haul all the equipments to UBC everytime and have to schedule around other things going on there. 

 

Probably also missing a lot of modern facilities/equipments that a practice facility will have. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

49 minutes ago, hammertime said:

I'm surprised Smyl hasn't quit. 

 

“I talked to Francesco about an identity. What is our identity? Where does it start? It starts with your accountability. It starts with your effort,” said Smyl.

“To get out of it, it’s not just going to be one individual. It’s going to take a team and they’ve got to come back to being a team, and make it hard to play against. That’s the identity I want for this organization, to be hard to play against. If I’m lining up against you, I’m going to make it as miserable as possible. That was my message to Francesco. I talked to the players about that this morning. I think that’s an important area and that’s an area we’ve got to start in.”

 

He was right! And Linden was right! They have their jerseys in the rafters for a reason they know a thing or 2 about what it takes to win. This MGMT group is an embarrassment. Epitome of "living day to day." Can't see beyond their noses.

 

I certainly won't be spending a dime on anything Canucks until their gone. 

 

I wouldn’t be surprised if Stan Smyl is the rumoured front office guy that may be retiring soon.

  • Cheers 1
  • There it is 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, JayDangles said:

You're right, its belittling, but belittling and diminishing a group of people or individuals based on their performance isn't sexist, regardless of the sex of the people. Adding the word "girls" in doesn't automatically mean that their weak performance is because they are girls. perhaps you need to view things differently and not go looking for the bad guy in everything.

Again, I ask the question. If the OP had said Allvin and the chipmunk boys, or rather lets say "Little man" Allvin and the chipmunks, would you have felt the immediate need to call that sexist against Allvin or men in general? 

Listen, I'm all for equality for women, and I absolutely whole heartedly believe a women's knowledge and experience in the field of sports business (or really anything else) can be equal to the greatest men. But I'm sorry, saying Allvin and the chipmunk girls, when in fact they are girls just isn't sexist unless you choose to put your own inferences or own spin on it that simply isnt there, which in my mind means you are perpetuating and more a part of the problem then the OP

The group of AGMs isn’t all girls, in fact there are no girls nor is it all female. There are two women amongst the group.  Adding girls to this mixed gender group was there exactly for the reason I stated. 
When you start with ‘I’m all for equality of women” you are dropping into the “all lives matter” territory of assuming you are an arbiter of equality. 

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, DrJockitch said:

The group of AGMs isn’t all girls, in fact there are no girls nor is it all female. There are two women amongst the group.  Adding girls to this mixed gender group was there exactly for the reason I stated. 

Yup this right here. He didn't say Alvin and his Chipmunk boys and girls. And yet there are only two women in that group. 

 

Anyone who can't see the intent in that is intentionally looking the other way.

 

It's not like I reported the guy or said he can't say it. I just think we have every right to call him on it.

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Canuck Surfer said:

Part of our problem is ''this mess!'' The pressure, or noise of our market. The gall to demand a championship in a 3 year stretch.

 

Yup, we are a middling team. There are good parts on this team, cough Pettersson. One problem is the lack of patience from, cough, fans.

 

People say they want a rebuild.  But hang out in a Post Game Thread after a loss. Too ''messy!'' The volume of manic depression is deafening.

 

 

Historically, teams like the Canucks could be fixed.  Admittedly, the trade market has been very stunted these last few years. Re the dead cap growth? But a Jim Rutherford in Carolina found pieces to make a cup winner at least once amongst historically worse performance.  Made Sid competitive every year. Vancouver, and other Canadian markets, don't have that said patience. Rebuild?

 

We are scared sh!tless if a Miller walks, or gets traded.  Then cry 6 months later when he was re-signed. People say it is the owner meddling.  It is the fans. Who should just enjoy the team, Hughes, PETEY!  It would make the atmosphere a lot easier if the team had honest support.

 

Instead we riot after any loss.

Are those the same people? Because I'm pretty sure most of us tankers are in the post game after every loss thrilled that we are one step closer to the Bedard lottery 

 

I'm happy when they win because I mean come on, it's hockey and it's Canucks, I can't help it... but I'm not upset when they lose right now. I'm done with the mushy middle, pick a direction... and you can't really just pick "up" towards being a cup contender these days with a stunted trade market, and free agency with no cap space. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, hammertime said:

I'm surprised Smyl hasn't quit. 

 

“I talked to Francesco about an identity. What is our identity? Where does it start? It starts with your accountability. It starts with your effort,” said Smyl.

“To get out of it, it’s not just going to be one individual. It’s going to take a team and they’ve got to come back to being a team, and make it hard to play against. That’s the identity I want for this organization, to be hard to play against. If I’m lining up against you, I’m going to make it as miserable as possible. That was my message to Francesco. I talked to the players about that this morning. I think that’s an important area and that’s an area we’ve got to start in.”

 

He was right! And Linden was right! They have their jerseys in the rafters for a reason they know a thing or 2 about what it takes to win. This MGMT group is an embarrassment. Epitome of "living day to day." Can't see beyond their noses.

 

I certainly won't be spending a dime on anything Canucks until their gone. 

 

So what about our owner’s accountability for his insisted upon direction?  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, JayDangles said:

I'm not an arbiter of equality, I was merely stating that I don't view myself as sexist, and am a firm believer that women as a sex are capable of many of the same achievements as men. I want it on the record so to speak.

 

Now, because we are two men (I'm assuming, and no, it's not because your a Dr. Lol) arguing about whether a comment regarding girls/women is sexist, I reached out and had my wife read the post. I intentionally didn't prepare her ahead of time that there may or may not be a sexist comment. I wanted to see her reaction.

She did not acknowledge the word girls in any way. Her take away was that management is gutless and failed the fans in that scenario.

When I asked her to go back and look at what was written and whether she viewed it as sexist her answer was a flat no. She felt it is not written in a way to intentionally imply that the fact they are women and referred to as girls means that's why they are being called out. She saw it was calling out all of management as a whole because Allvin is included.

However she explained that there could be those who would look at that and see it as sexist, but they would have to add an additional narrative to support that view. Some people don't even realize they are creating the narrative, others do it intentionally. 

Her view is that those who intentionally add a narrative to a comment in order to draw out negativity are as much a problem in today's society, as the people who go around making actual terrible comments.

 Then there are those who are just easily offended and take things personal even when it has nothing to do with them. 

Anyways, we can agree to disagree, but at the end of the day I don't think either of us feel adding the word girls was done because the OP is sexist. So if you don't believe the intent was from a place of evil, then what are you trying to gain by trying to push the comment in that direction? 

 

And that my friend is the root of cancel culture. When people decide they personally don't like it even though it has nothing to do with them and therefore the world must also know and be as outraged as them.

 

Don’t the guys playing often say to “let’s go boys” when referring to their teammates?  I’ve heard our women’s teams say similar when they say “let’s go girls”.  These are men and women referring to themselves as boys and girls.  But they are players.  I’m thinking the people in management jobs, even though it’s hockey, don’t refer to themselves as boys and girls, but rather as men and women.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, VforVasili said:

Yup this right here. He didn't say Alvin and his Chipmunk boys and girls. And yet there are only two women in that group. 

 

Anyone who can't see the intent in that is intentionally looking the other way.

 

It's not like I reported the guy or said he can't say it. I just think we have every right to call him on it.

And by the same token others can call you on their opinions or must we all kow tow to your opinion, sounds like canacel culture to me

 

 

Edited by Fred65
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, ShawnAntoski said:

"Well believe it or not, neither Rutherford, Alvin or any of the Chipmunk Girls"

 

Well said and lol.  Also, where is Francesco cause it should be him facing the STH's.  Says a lot about Francesco 

Not his job.  I'd be pissed at my staff though 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...