| Author |
 Topic  |
|
Guest9494
( )
|
 Posted - 02/22/2010 : 08:42:13
|
quote:
Originally posted by Guest0854
quote:
Originally posted by Guest9494
Interesting stat to tonights game Crosby was a -3 and so was Nash maybe we should be giving them less icetime
No it was minus 2. Are you kidding me? Nash and Crosby at the near the end was dynamite. They can't help sloppy plays by Pronger, Boyle and Brodeur. If you are going to lay the blame of the loss on anyone it is the goalie and defense.
Miller was - indescribable. Canadian offense did everything it could and more to get the puck pass him. Keith and Weber were the best defensive pairing in the game. Oh Jay Bo where are you now? Can I trade Pronger for you.
Getzlaf looked better tonight. He was moving and wasn't knocked off his feet so easily. Nash is a beast. Alongside with Toews and Crosby, were probably the best offensive players.
What a terrible weekend for Canada. Not only did they only come out with only 2 of a possible 6 medals, losing to the American but Ms. Rochette has a montrous set back. My condolences to you and your family.
Sigh. Let's hope for a better week moving forward.
No he was a -3 pp goal does nothing also good to know he likes to show up last 2 mins of the game exactly who I want on my top line throughout the game |
 |
|
|
Russia
Top Prospect
8 Posts |
Posted - 02/22/2010 : 11:52:57
|
| Canadian losers.final have spoil Russia-Canada |
|
|
|
Alex116
PickupHockey Legend
6113 Posts |
Posted - 02/22/2010 : 17:28:13
|
quote:
Originally posted by Beans15
quote:
Originally posted by Hugh G. Rection
Playing like they did today... the Russians will steamroll Canada. If anything I'm glad we didn't get the bye, we need the extra game to figure out how to play better hockey. Seriously Pronger needs to not play anymore.... at all.
Doughty was our best player tonight and he's 20. Scary stuff, but its not over yet. Lets not look past the Germans either, considering the scare the Swiss gave us.
What did Pronger do wrong??? Outside of the mistake against the Swiss, he has been a rock!
I also have to disagree that if that Canada team plays Russia we lose. If Canada puts that kind of pressure against the Russians, they will fold like that cheap card table sitting in your basement. Another huge reason why the American's won last night was that they played one of the most disciplined games I have ever watched. They played clean then entire time and Canada had the puck in their end for 1/2 the 1st period, nearly the entire 2nd period, and the last 1/2 of the 3rd period.
The Russian defense could not handle that and they would take penalties a plenty.
I don't know why people are so negative?? It was a poor result but the team played better than the last 2 games and if there was any player in net last night other than Ryan Miller, Canada wins.
Beans, Pronger's been awful. Guys are getting around him with ease. He's looking his age out there. Not to mention, where's the mean streak that he's known for? Yeah, i know you don't want him taking penalties, but he's gotta play a lot tougher than he has. I was all for him making this team and thought that being on the NHL rink would enable him to have an impact but so far, it's been a negative impact. Even heard one local sportscaster here say they shouldn't even dress him anymore?
I do agree with you that Miller was the ONLY reason that we lost that game. Unfortunately, that's what can happen in a "one and done" type tournament, and that's what we're facing now! I too think Russia would have trouble with us if we play like that. However, let's not put too much into the 2-1 shot advantage we had. Remember, most teams with a lead, tend to play a little more defensively so the fact that the US led for most of the game prob had something to do with that. |
|
|
|
irvine
PickupHockey Veteran
Canada
1315 Posts |
Posted - 02/22/2010 : 18:55:42
|
Very well said Alex116. I agree with you completely regarding Pronger. His age is certainly showing during this tournament. You can see the opposition targeting his side of the ice, because he's just too slow. If the opposition play physical with Pronger, he wears out over time, add that with his lack of speed these days, they can beat him to the inside and outside, with some effort.
He's not playing as 'mean' as he is known for. Perhaps he's just not the Pronger we've all known over the past, he's aging.
Miller did play exceptionally well, but the road isn't over yet. If we do make it past Germany & Greiss (also playing decent, on a lesser team) we will face Bryzgalov or Nabokov (Nabby is playing very well too) and at some point, we may face the Swedes. And Lundqvist has 2 GP, 2 shutouts.
So no matter what team we face here after, the goaltending is going to be superb or near it. So we're going to have to have better & quicker puck movement to solve these guys. Miller is a butterfly goalie... we should have been going high on him, yet we shot low a lot. Miller will rob us, or anyone, going low 95% of the time.
As for Perry... I'm sorry, but he's not playing very well at all. We need to keep our lines similar, enough switching them all around. Let the guys showing chemistry stay together. Our top guys need to play the top minutes. Iginla, Nash, Crosby & Heatley. So and so forth. Stop trying to even out the playing time.
It's a tough road ahead. Hopefully Team Canada get pull it together.
Irvine/prez. |
|
|
|
ryan93
PickupHockey Pro
Canada
996 Posts |
Posted - 02/22/2010 : 19:23:20
|
| Good post irvine, i agree on pretty well all fronts. |
|
|
|
Beans15
Moderator
Canada
8286 Posts |
Posted - 02/22/2010 : 20:57:44
|
Well maybe my Patriotic side is clouding my vision. Personally, I have watched Pronger make stop after stop against the oppositions best. Smart step in fronts, great stick work. Great break out pass. Solid PP quarterback.
Perry has done everything a 3rd line players should do but only he is an offensive threat every time he touches the puck. Physical, go to the net, shoot. He made a lazy move back on the puck and Kessler did one of the best plays on an empty net a guy could do.
Don't let one play cloud the vision of the whole. I've watched Crosby give up in the Neutral zone a good dozen times in the past 3 games but I am not willing to throw him under the bus. Iginla(who I think is hurt) is not playing like himself either.
Honestly, I can't say a bad thing about any of the Canadian players and the team overall. There have been a few bonehead plays by just about everyone and unluckily(is that a word??) most of them have been capitalized on by the opposition.
If so many people are saying that Miller is the biggest, if not the only reason the US team won, what does Canada have to pull together?? Honestly, that game yesterday beats most teams on most nights including the Russians, Sweds, Fins, and the US.
Unfortunately, I'm not sure the Canadians can get any better than they were last night. The difference will come down to goaltending. Hopefully we don't see the 2nd best Olympic Goaltending performance in history in the next 4 games.
Actually, what Canada has to do is stop playing from behind. Punish early, get ahead, and keep the pedal down. |
|
|
|
Alex116
PickupHockey Legend
6113 Posts |
Posted - 02/22/2010 : 23:22:10
|
quote:
Originally posted by Beans15
Unfortunately, I'm not sure the Canadians can get any better than they were last night. The difference will come down to goaltending. Hopefully we don't see the 2nd best Olympic Goaltending performance in history in the next 4 games.
Unless it's from Luongo i guess?  |
|
|
|
willus3
Moderator
Canada
1948 Posts |
Posted - 02/23/2010 : 06:50:00
|
Beans you're not alone. Pronger has not been bad. But because McKenzie and company go on like they do the parrots repeat the nonsense on forums like this. Pronger has also been the "nastiest" player on Canada easily. If he were any more so he would be in the box all game. Would people rather that? Unlikely.
It's funny, the first couple games the analysts were praising Pronger and Neidermayer and criticizing the the younger players like Doughty. Now suddenly Pronger and Neidermayer are the goats and Doughty the second coming of Potvin. So a rookie can have two questionable games and then a decent one and it's "he's played fantastic the entire tournament" from McKenzie and the two veterans actually do play well the entire tournament and they're showing they're age. Exactly why I don't care to listen to hockey analysts. In fact the only analysts I do pay attention to are the former goalies when they are talking about goalies.
The truth of the matter is no single defenceman has stood out for team Canada and that needs to change.
To be honest I don't think Canada would have a problem with Russia from what I have seen so far. The Americans play better defensively and Canada had 44 shots on them. If Nabokov is in net they shouldn't have a problem scoring. What Canada needs is Luongo or Brodeur to play how they are capable of playing. If they do that then Canada wins.
But let's not count our chickens before they hatch like the "Own the podium" group did. We have to beat Germany first.
|
|
|
|
n/a
deleted
4809 Posts |
Posted - 02/23/2010 : 07:05:59
|
Great analysis as usual, Willus.
I am excited to see my first Canadian game tonight, as because of my vacation overseas I only caught a few replays of a couple other games.
I am very pleased, actually, that Canada meets Germany angry and not over-confident - I predict a solid blow-out victory.
The Canadians do not need any motivation at all against Alexander the Great and the Russian juggernaut . . . and I am GLAD that Russia will not have an extra game to build chemistry that they clearly lack in many areas. Defence and goaltending are the key, and even if OV scores a hattrick and has an awesome game, I still think Russia's somewhat weak D and weaker goaltending (IMHO) will provide a deluge of goals.
Looking too far ahead if I may, it's the Swedes that look the scariest to me, they look like the team to beat so far. Their D has been impeccable, goaltending stellar, and their lines are clicking.
"Take off, eh?" - Bob and Doug |
|
|
|
willus3
Moderator
Canada
1948 Posts |
Posted - 02/23/2010 : 07:21:33
|
Forgot to say in my last post about Perry.
That empty net goal was inexcusable. Absolutely inexcusable. Perry didn't even put his stick down! What the hell was he doing? I wanted to jump through the screen and strangle him.
|
|
|
|
Alex116
PickupHockey Legend
6113 Posts |
Posted - 02/23/2010 : 08:57:09
|
Willus.....FYI, it's not just hockey analysts who are claiming that Pronger has not played well. Oh, and even if it were, i'm sorry dude, but you being a moderator on a hockey forum vs their knowledge, i'd take them everytime. ESPECIALLY when one of our "moderators" goes to the point of calling those of us agreeing with them PARROTS! Personally, i feel that to be insulting and don't think you set a very good example.
Back to Pronger and the opinions on him. I've listened to the radio, i've watched the television (including NBC where even the American sportscaster said "Pronger's a shadow of his former self") and guess what, i've even attended a Canada game and listened to the complaints of other fans.....errrrrr PARROTS, and sorry pal, you're in the minority with your opinion of him. In fact, you can be thankful it's only an opinion, because opinions can't technically be wrong. If Pronger's play is what you'd consider to be in the category of "not bad", then i'd love to coach vs you anyday. Heck, i'd love to be on your payroll if that's the kind of effort and performance you expect from some of your best! Just answer me this....why has his ice time decreased in each game from one game to the next? Hmmm.....i could be wrong, but perhaps it's because his play just isn't up to the level that the coaching staff expected, especially as the games have gotten progressively tougher???
As for Doughty, the kid made one mistake vs the Swiss and you claim he's had "two questionable games and then a decent one...."? That's borderline comical. However, to say "...the two veterans actually do play well the entire tournament...." really is funny. If you truly believe those statements, then you prob feel like Marty had a good game on Sunday as well?
Then again, what do i know? I'm just a parrot.....
|
|
|
|
Guest8332
( )
|
Posted - 02/23/2010 : 09:34:31
|
quote:
Originally posted by willus3
Beans you're not alone. Pronger has not been bad. But because McKenzie and company go on like they do the parrots repeat the nonsense on forums like this. Pronger has also been the "nastiest" player on Canada easily. If he were any more so he would be in the box all game. Would people rather that? Unlikely.
I would say Nash and Morrow have been the nastiest. Everybody has their head on a swivel when they are on the ice.
quote:
Originally posted by willus3
It's funny, the first couple games the analysts were praising Pronger and Neidermayer and criticizing the the younger players like Doughty. Now suddenly Pronger and Neidermayer are the goats and Doughty the second coming of Potvin. So a rookie can have two questionable games and then a decent one and it's "he's played fantastic the entire tournament" from McKenzie and the two veterans actually do play well the entire tournament and they're showing they're age. Exactly why I don't care to listen to hockey analysts. In fact the only analysts I do pay attention to are the former goalies when they are talking about goalies.
The truth of the matter is no single defenceman has stood out for team Canada and that needs to change.
Pronger had some moments with having great body and stick positions. But it seems the communication between he and his partner (Boyle and Weber) isn't great and puts them out of position.
quote:
Originally posted by willus3
But let's not count our chickens before they hatch like the "Own the podium" group did. We have to beat Germany first.
A statement no one can disagree with. |
|
|
|
Hugh G. Rection
Rookie
165 Posts |
Posted - 02/23/2010 : 10:22:20
|
Lol if you think people are saying Pronger was bad just b/c the analysts said that. Did you watch the game? The guy is a dinosaur and guys just skate around him now. Anyone calling him a 'rock' needs to watch him more closely. It's not the year 2000 anymore, and the guy has definitely lost a step or two.
People criticized one play of Doughty's vs Switzerland, and he's done nothing but be the most reliable D-man since then. Niedermeyer has been average. It's not just the analysts saying this too- compare the ice times of all D-men from the first to the third period. If Pronger is so good why did they reduce his ice time in the 2nd/3rd? And increase Doughty's/Keiths? Must be a conspiracy.
I think 'own the podium' and all the b.s. TSN commercials ('We just might win it all!! Do you believe?) was one of the most awful marketing campaigns of all time. I won a very easy $20 off my friend who fell for that garbage.
Also, I had a dream (nightmare?) last night Canada was losing 3-0 to Germany going into the third, so hopefully I am not the next Nostradamus. |
|
|
|
Beans15
Moderator
Canada
8286 Posts |
Posted - 02/23/2010 : 10:42:03
|
I completely agree with Willus on this and personally thought the parrot comment was dead on. If MacKenzie showed 5 clips of Pronger making smart defensive plays, breaking up cycles in the corners, and making clean and tight break out passes, everyone on here would be complaining about Weber and not scoring with that big shot from the point or some other baseless arguement towards someone on team Canada.
The funny thing that people are missing is that in games one and two, people (including some on here) as well as the media were talking about the stability, poise, and performance of both Pronger and Neidermayer. Then, mouth piece McGuire makes a stupid comment part way through the 3rd period about the "changing of the guard" and everyone changes their tune!!
I would not disagree that neither Pronger or Neidermayer had standout games against the US, but they were not horrible and definately were not the blame of the loss. And to the comment about the reduction of ice time, well Keith and Doughty were both having very good games. Why wouldn't Babcock give them more time??? If Pronger is playing great against Zee Germans, he will be more time as well!! That's just good coaching.
Again, more than anything else, if Canada wins the game against the US, no one is saying anything about Pronger and Neidermayer.
|
|
|
|
n/a
deleted
4809 Posts |
Posted - 02/23/2010 : 11:07:20
|
To comment on what Willus said . . . I think he is also dead on with the "parrot" comment. Most people just repeat an opinion, and anything reotely related to possible evidence only confirms what they have been told. I myself have made this contention many times on this forum - and to get all riled up because you think you might be the one perfect person who can somehow maintain 100% fairness and objectivity is ridiculous.
Even speaking about myself - and I consider myself a person who is very single-minded and who isn't easily influenced - I have made many assumptions in the past because I was told something over and over again, only to see later when really observing that it wasn't so. I believe that we talked about Weber being a "shoe-in" on the Canadian Olympic team with this exact point being made by Willus, and I conceded with chagrin that my opinion of how great Weber was was almost solely based on commentators who said so.
It is perfectly ok, and some might even say mature, to admit, on occasion, that one's opinion may have been borrowed unintentionally from other sources.
Further than that, I can't comment - haven't seen team Canada play yet. But I will give a full and detailed analysis tomorrow, I can tell you that! And I will be watching the game with the sound off, to ensure it's my OWN opinion, lol . . .
"Take off, eh?" - Bob and Doug |
|
|
|
Beans15
Moderator
Canada
8286 Posts |
Posted - 02/23/2010 : 11:17:37
|
quote:
Originally posted by slozo
Further than that, I can't comment - haven't seen team Canada play yet. But I will give a full and detailed analysis tomorrow, I can tell you that! And I will be watching the game with the sound off, to ensure it's my OWN opinion, lol . . .
"Take off, eh?" - Bob and Doug
Very interesting point, although I understand it to be in jest.
Last week, the Czeck/Slovak game was on while I was working into the evening. Because of this, I did not have access to a tv but did have my computer. For some reason I could not get the sound going so I watched the game with eyes only. It was odd as I could hear the sounds of the game, just not the commentary.
I have to say, it was one of the most enjoyable ways to watch the sport. Maybe not this Canada/Germany game but I would encourage everyone to watch a full game in the future with no sound. It's amazing what you see when you are not being told what you see. |
|
|
|
willus3
Moderator
Canada
1948 Posts |
Posted - 02/23/2010 : 11:39:46
|
quote:
Originally posted by Alex116
Willus.....FYI, it's not just hockey analysts who are claiming that Pronger ...
... I'm just a parrot.....
Well it looks as though my moderating brethren fully support what I said. Hope you weren't expecting an apology.
By the way, Doughty made the bad play that cost a goal against the Swiss but, and I'm not sure about this, maybe you didn't notice the other bad decisions and plays he made in the first two games because the analysts didn't bring it up.  |
|
|
|
Beans15
Moderator
Canada
8286 Posts |
Posted - 02/23/2010 : 11:55:15
|
quote:
Originally posted by willus3
quote:
Originally posted by Alex116
Willus.....FYI, it's not just hockey analysts who are claiming that Pronger ...
... I'm just a parrot.....
Well it looks as though my moderating brethren fully support what I said. Hope you weren't expecting an apology.
By the way, Doughty made the bad play that cost a goal against the Swiss but, and I'm not sure about this, maybe you didn't notice the other bad decisions and plays he made in the first two games because the analysts didn't bring it up.
Good call Willus. Frankly, the entire 1st period of the Norway game Doughtly looked like a deer in the headlights, but the commentators talked about the 20 yr old, first time Olympian so people gave him a break.
Following the horrible goal by the Swiss, Doughty got benched for nearly the rest of the period, but again, he's just 20 yrs old, give him a break.
Granted, I thought he played great against the US. However, this is a perfect example of the "what have you done for me lately" attitude. Doughty plays average at best for 2 games and plays solid for 1 and he gets credit for playing awesome for 3 games.
I went to a smaller school in Alberta, but even so, that match just doesn't add up. |
|
|
|
Alex116
PickupHockey Legend
6113 Posts |
Posted - 02/23/2010 : 12:10:15
|
quote:
Originally posted by Beans15
I have to say, it was one of the most enjoyable ways to watch the sport. Maybe not this Canada/Germany game but I would encourage everyone to watch a full game in the future with no sound. It's amazing what you see when you are not being told what you see.
Beans, just so you know, this "parrot" was at the Swiss/Canada game. At games, there's no commentator to influence me. Personally, regardless of what Mackenzie and the other analysts say, i don't think Pronger played particularly well. Maybe i expect too much of him? However, you just finished saying The funny thing that people are missing is that in games one and two, people (including some on here) as well as the media were talking about the stability, poise, and performance of both Pronger and Neidermayer. Then, mouth piece McGuire makes a stupid comment part way through the 3rd period about the "changing of the guard" and everyone changes their tune!!? Is this what you agree with? Do you really think Pronger had a good game 1 and 2? Because, let me remind you of what you said following the narrow win vs the Swiss, and i quote....
Seriously wonder if I am watching the same game as everyone else. I thought that there was not a single Canadian defender who had a good game last night. Boyle was about the best.
Stupid mistake by Doughty cost the first goal, stupid mistake by Pronger cost the second goal.
Like i said, i guess i'm expecting too much from Pronger? I can't stand the guy, but was one of the guys defending the pick of him to this team. Maybe he's not been as bad as we make him out to be, but he's def not playing what i would consider "well". Great stick, yup, but if he misses on a poke, he's done. Forwards seem to be able to walk around him.
|
|
|
|
Alex116
PickupHockey Legend
6113 Posts |
Posted - 02/23/2010 : 12:17:18
|
quote:
Originally posted by willus3
quote:
Originally posted by Alex116
Willus.....FYI, it's not just hockey analysts who are claiming that Pronger ...
... I'm just a parrot.....
Well it looks as though my moderating brethren fully support what I said. Hope you weren't expecting an apology.
By the way, Doughty made the bad play that cost a goal against the Swiss but, and I'm not sure about this, maybe you didn't notice the other bad decisions and plays he made in the first two games because the analysts didn't bring it up.
Willus...no apology was expected. What i would expect from you and other moderators would be to keep a level of consistency. While a "parrot" may not be as strong as calling someone an "idiot", i certainly wouldn't consider it to be a compliment and actual would call it insulting. Last time i checked, personal attacks / insults, etc were not tolerated around here. S'all good, call me what you want, my opinion is all i was offering. If it differs with yours, so be it. You wanna call me names, i'm okay with that. BUT, try to moderate with the same rules as you enforce on others...... 
By the way, read my last post and in particular, Beans' comment regarding the goals the Swiss scored on us, to see who in cost the "other" goal vs the Swiss. |
|
|
|
Beans15
Moderator
Canada
8286 Posts |
Posted - 02/23/2010 : 12:22:00
|
Hey Alex, I know what I said. Let's not get selective about what we post and what we don't post. What you failed to remind people of is the comment I made about Pronger after game one. Where I agreed that his mobility was lacking, specifically against Thoreston, but that he played well overall and has the best stick in the game.
Furthermore, I have and always will stay consistant with my opinions. Pronger made a stupid miskate that lead to a goal. But not all stupid mistakes lead to goals. All the Canadian d-men (and forward for that matter) have made mistakes but not all of them lead to goals. Does that one mistake means Pronger played a poor game over all?? Nope. I never said that anyone played preticularly well, but I also never said that anyone played preticularly poorly either. Maybe I need to be more clear. Saying no one played a good game could mean everything from horrible to average. I'll take the heat for that and can appreciate where the confusion could be.
However, can you honestly say that Canada beats Switzerland or USA with a different player on defense than Pronger?? I don't think you can. It's easy to point fingers, but did his play cost the team the game??? |
|
|
|
Alex116
PickupHockey Legend
6113 Posts |
Posted - 02/23/2010 : 12:32:42
|
quote:
Originally posted by Beans15
Hey Alex, I know what I said. Let's not get selective about what we post and what we don't post. What you failed to remind people of is the comment I made about Pronger after game one. Where I agreed that his mobility was lacking, specifically against Thoreston, but that he played well overall and has the best stick in the game.
Furthermore, I have and always will stay consistant with my opinions. Pronger made a stupid miskate that lead to a goal. But not all stupid mistakes lead to goals. All the Canadian d-men (and forward for that matter) have made mistakes but not all of them lead to goals. Does that one mistake means Pronger played a poor game over all?? Nope. I never said that anyone played preticularly well, but I also never said that anyone played preticularly poorly either. Maybe I need to be more clear. Saying no one played a good game could mean everything from horrible to average. I'll take the heat for that and can appreciate where the confusion could be.
However, can you honestly say that Canada beats Switzerland or USA with a different player on defense than Pronger?? I don't think you can. It's easy to point fingers, but did his play cost the team the game???
Beans, you're correct, i failed to mention the comment you made of Pronger re the Norway game. This would be because it didn't stand out in my mind. The fact you stated that you didn't feel that any Canadian defender had a good game vs the Swiss stood out in my mind. That's why i quoted that particular comment from you. I did not bother to search for all of your comments. If that's being "selective", sorry, but it's what stood out in my memory.
As for your other comment about beating the Swiss or US with someone other than Pronger, no. I completely agree that it would hardly have made a difference i'm sure. That doesn't take away from my opinion that he hasn't played well. Again, maybe i'm expecting too much but my original comment NEVER said anything about him costing us a game. I just think he's struggling and not playing to his potential. Who knows, he could be our MVP by the time this is over by playing a few stellar games? So far, i just don't think he's played well, that's all....
|
|
|
|
JOSHUACANADA
PickupHockey Veteran
Canada
2308 Posts |
Posted - 02/23/2010 : 12:49:42
|
| I am of the opinion that having a younger smoother skating Bouwmeester may have changed the game. If Pronger has lost a step, and you know I f the opposition is going to drive down his side of the rink, then pull him. This is the top players in the world driving down his side of the rink not some 2nd-3rd liner who has 5 goals on the year. If a guy doesn't have it he doesn't have it. I'd rather work with a player who has the tools but need to be shown how to use them than a guy working without the tools. Same goes for Scott N. Let them Captain and Assist Captain for 5-10 minutes a game, and put the fresh legs in. |
|
|
|
Hugh G. Rection
Rookie
165 Posts |
Posted - 02/23/2010 : 15:45:44
|
| I'd just like to say that all of my opinions expressed are merely repeating what the talking heads on TSN have said. I am not capable of individual rational thoughts, or of forming unique opinions on hockey games. Pronger should be the MVP of the tournament. The moderators on here are reasonable and consistent in their analysis and postings. No part of this post is sarcastic whatsoever. |
|
|
|
willus3
Moderator
Canada
1948 Posts |
Posted - 02/23/2010 : 16:11:47
|
quote:
Originally posted by Alex116
quote:
Originally posted by willus3
quote:
Originally posted by Alex116
Willus.....FYI, it's not just hockey analysts who are claiming that Pronger ...
... I'm just a parrot.....
Well it looks as though my moderating brethren fully support what I said. Hope you weren't expecting an apology.
By the way, Doughty made the bad play that cost a goal against the Swiss but, and I'm not sure about this, maybe you didn't notice the other bad decisions and plays he made in the first two games because the analysts didn't bring it up.
Willus...no apology was expected. What i would expect from you and other moderators would be to keep a level of consistency. While a "parrot" may not be as strong as calling someone an "idiot", i certainly wouldn't consider it to be a compliment and actual would call it insulting. Last time i checked, personal attacks / insults, etc were not tolerated around here. S'all good, call me what you want, my opinion is all i was offering. If it differs with yours, so be it. You wanna call me names, i'm okay with that. BUT, try to moderate with the same rules as you enforce on others......
By the way, read my last post and in particular, Beans' comment regarding the goals the Swiss scored on us, to see who in cost the "other" goal vs the Swiss.
First if you are going to continue down the road questioning my moderating I will direct you to the this thread rule number 5 specifically. http://www.pickuphockey.com/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=609 or here http://www.pickuphockey.com/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=2160
Second, nowhere did I specifically call you a parrot. It was a general comment responding to a few posts that were almost word for word what Bob McKenzie and crew said post game. When the comments are almost verbatim it's a logical conclusion to assume it's a regurgitation. If that included your post, so be it. |
Edited by - willus3 on 02/23/2010 16:14:44 |
|
|
|
willus3
Moderator
Canada
1948 Posts |
Posted - 02/23/2010 : 16:12:56
|
quote:
Originally posted by Hugh G. Rection
I'd just like to say that all of my opinions expressed are merely repeating what the talking heads on TSN have said. I am not capable of individual rational thoughts, or of forming unique opinions on hockey games. Pronger should be the MVP of the tournament. The moderators on here are reasonable and consistent in their analysis and postings. No part of this post is sarcastic whatsoever.
That's even more clever than your handle.
 |
|
|
|
irvine
PickupHockey Veteran
Canada
1315 Posts |
Posted - 02/23/2010 : 16:26:28
|
I think this topic is getting out of hand, personally. Both by members & moderators. We come here to discuss hockey, not call each other names or treat each other as lesser individuals. These are opinions. No one here has stated a fact yet, so I'm unsure how one persons opinion is greater than the other.
With that being said... You can call me a 'parrot' all you'd like, or any one else here. But don't act like everyone else has agreed with a commentator and shared the same opinion or opinion basis at least, and you have not. If you disagree 100% of the time with every commentator, I guess you're the Captain. Us just your Parrots.
Now, as to what I had said in my last post... these are exactly HOW I FEEL regarding Pronger, Miller, Perry & Team Canada.
I truly do believe Pronger is slower than he once was, and players (US or otherwise), are using that to their advantage. Regarding him not playing as 'mean' as he's known for, I agree with MY SELF yet again. He's not been playing as physical of a game as we'd see in the NHL. With International Rules in affect, that's good in a sense. But we need to wear down the opposition.
PS, Bob McKenzie just texted me. Told me to say that. Any complaints, send him an email.
Irvine/prez. |
Edited by - irvine on 02/23/2010 16:28:05 |
|
|
|
Alex116
PickupHockey Legend
6113 Posts |
Posted - 02/23/2010 : 19:16:50
|
quote:
Originally posted by willus3
First if you are going to continue down the road questioning my moderating I will direct you to the this thread rule number 5 specifically. http://www.pickuphockey.com/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=609 or here http://www.pickuphockey.com/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=2160
Second, nowhere did I specifically call you a parrot. It was a general comment responding to a few posts that were almost word for word what Bob McKenzie and crew said post game. When the comments are almost verbatim it's a logical conclusion to assume it's a regurgitation. If that included your post, so be it.
Willus, please explain your point with rule 5. Am i arguing with you? I simply have a different opinion on the topic on hand. Aside from that, all i did was request that you abide by the same rules that you expect us to. If you refer to the part that say's "What Admins and Mod's say is the law", i'm pretty sure that doesn't point to your opinions on topics, but hey, maybe i'm wrong?
Perhaps you should read the rules in the second link where it clearly states ".....it is perfectly fine to have a differing opinion about hockey than a moderator...." or the other part that says "Please respect your fellow members. Follow the Golden Rule and treat others as you would like to be treated. Personal attacks are not tolerated." If you don't consider calling those of us who agree with Mckenzie et al "parrots" then your post was very poorly written. That to me and other says in simpler terms, "you guys don't / can't form your own opinions therefore you simply agree with what a so called hockey expert says". No, that's not insulting at all is it???
Oh, and for the record, i watched the game at a bar downtown and left immediately after it to go to the Sweden/Finland game. I didn't see nor hear any comments or chats with the analysts/experts. Maybe i wasn't one of those you were even referring to but that's not the point. It is of my opinion that you, of all people, shouldn't be calling people names or accusing other posters or insulting them which is what you've done.
My apologies to everyone as this has gone way off topic, but i'm not the type to go whining to admin regarding someone's actions. I'll do my best to go back to the hockey topics we are supposed to be discussing here. |
|
|
|
irvine
PickupHockey Veteran
Canada
1315 Posts |
Posted - 02/23/2010 : 20:30:21
|
I don't watch post game coverage, as I have no interest in it. So even if my opinion were the exact same, or no where near it... I really have no clue. It could even be in between.
The fact is, I formed what I felt about Pronger. Which is what I have witnessed while watching him during these Olympic games. I am going to agree with Alex. I have no clue who it is you were referring too. It may have been one person, it may have been several. Me, Alex, Guest, I have no idea. I also don't really care who it was meant for.
I will say this. I enjoy PickUp Hockey, and the posters that are here. This is the reason I continue to post. I have no issues with anyone, at all. But I'm not overly pleased with the suggestion that every one here is a parrot, besides your self. If we are to keep personal / rude comments to our selves, I expect the same from moderators. No one is above the law. :)
With that being said, and as I have previously mentioned. I don't wish for anything more to become of this, or for it to carry on. This is my final post regarding it. I just want it made clear, my personal opinion regarding this is that I wish to be treated as I would treat you. I have never called any person on this forum, any form of name and I don't wish to be called one in return.
By naming somebody a parrot, you are simply referring to that person as an individual who can not form their own opinion. Thus they must mimmick those of others. To me this says you believe everyone is a 'moron' with no knowledge of hockey any where as equal to that of yours. Simply untrue. :)
Irvine/prez. |
Edited by - irvine on 02/23/2010 20:32:08 |
|
|
|
willus3
Moderator
Canada
1948 Posts |
Posted - 02/23/2010 : 21:33:14
|
quote:
Originally posted by Alex116
quote:
Originally posted by willus3
First if you are going to continue down the road questioning my moderating I will direct you to the this thread rule number 5 specifically. http://www.pickuphockey.com/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=609 or here http://www.pickuphockey.com/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=2160
Second, nowhere did I specifically call you a parrot. It was a general comment responding to a few posts that were almost word for word what Bob McKenzie and crew said post game. When the comments are almost verbatim it's a logical conclusion to assume it's a regurgitation. If that included your post, so be it.
Willus, please explain your point with rule 5. Am i arguing with you? I simply have a different opinion on the topic on hand. Aside from that, all i did was request that you abide by the same rules that you expect us to. If you refer to the part that say's "What Admins and Mod's say is the law", i'm pretty sure that doesn't point to your opinions on topics, but hey, maybe i'm wrong?
Perhaps you should read the rules in the second link where it clearly states ".....it is perfectly fine to have a differing opinion about hockey than a moderator...." or the other part that says "Please respect your fellow members. Follow the Golden Rule and treat others as you would like to be treated. Personal attacks are not tolerated." If you don't consider calling those of us who agree with Mckenzie et al "parrots" then your post was very poorly written. That to me and other says in simpler terms, "you guys don't / can't form your own opinions therefore you simply agree with what a so called hockey expert says". No, that's not insulting at all is it???
Oh, and for the record, i watched the game at a bar downtown and left immediately after it to go to the Sweden/Finland game. I didn't see nor hear any comments or chats with the analysts/experts. Maybe i wasn't one of those you were even referring to but that's not the point. It is of my opinion that you, of all people, shouldn't be calling people names or accusing other posters or insulting them which is what you've done.
My apologies to everyone as this has gone way off topic, but i'm not the type to go whining to admin regarding someone's actions. I'll do my best to go back to the hockey topics we are supposed to be discussing here.
You have repeatedly called into question my moderating in this thread. That's the No No. Don't bring up issues with Mod's in the threads. It's pretty clearly stated in the rules. You're not the type to go whining to Admin but if you have a problem with Mods or others those are the rules aren't they. So I guess you have a choice to make. Making any further comments in this thread about this would be the wrong choice. |
|
|
|
Beans15
Moderator
Canada
8286 Posts |
Posted - 02/23/2010 : 22:17:05
|
Just for everyone's information, I do take this moderating things seriously. I have the responsibility to follow and uphold the rules of the forum as set out by the Higher Power (admin) and if that means moderating other moderators, that's what I do and have done in the past.
The reason I did not make any adjustments or edit the parrot comment is because it was a non-discriminating general comment. If people took it personally, that is their own doing. All he said was that many comments were just that. Rightly or wrongly, that is his opinion. Willus' comment was about parrots regurgitating what media says. He did not say any individual posters were parrots, only that some opinions are that of parrots.
Again, Willus is dead right. The issue is not weather you agree with a moderator's opinions or not. The question is if the moderators are upholding the rules and guidelines of the forum as well as following said rules. If anyone feels that this is not the case, the e-mail to admin is anonymous and trust me when I say that admin NEVER states who the person was who brought up an issue. Admin makes a decision and then informs the Mods. We stick to those rules and if we don't, admin will remove that person(s) from being mods.
Now that is done, can we get back to talking about hockey and stop wizzing in each others Corn Flakes??? Talking hockey is so much more enjoyable. |
Edited by - Beans15 on 02/23/2010 23:10:14 |
|
|
|
redneck76ca
Rookie
186 Posts |
Posted - 02/23/2010 : 23:32:06
|
Power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutely.
It might be time to take a look at the forum rules? I, personally, feel that people in power must be held up to a higher standard. Whether a comment is general or not as to who it is addressed is irrelevant. I found the parrot comment insulting as well. I have watched all the games but have not had the luxury of sound as I am working on one of the LiveCity sites. Yet I agree that Pronger hasn't looked very good. To dismiss ones opinion based on the fact that it agrees with an analysts doesn't make us parrots. |
|
|
|
Guest4409
( )
|
Posted - 02/24/2010 : 00:40:57
|
I have to agree with Alex and Redneck on this one.
I respect the opinions of moderators, especially Willus, Beans not so much (reasons to follow) but their responsibilities involve being prone to the rules, above and beyond that of the occasional "poster", and reading this thread, I believe that the moderators are banding together unanimously against a common threat to deflect criticism that could make them look as bad as the the "posters" they so often chastise.
"Parrots" is indeed an insulting comment, regardless of whether (to Beans; note the difference between "weather" as in temperature and "whether" regarding either or) the comment is directed at an individual or a group. Just because someone doesn't or does agree with a commentator does not make them a repetitious commenter. A lot of people watch the games we speak of, and regardless of their hockey "pedigree", will feel the same, or oppositely, as the commentators. This does not indicate a disposition to regurgitating what the panel says. Personally directed or not, "parrots" is an insulting comment. I guess if it opposes your view point it is considered "irrelevant" or perhaps not substantial enough to warrant a "moderator's" (notice the quotations) discipline.
Pronger and Neidermayer did not play as soundly as veteran bodies are anticipated to play. I think that is the main point most of the critics are alluding to. Yes, the analysts are pointing out the same, but regardless, it is obvious, seeing decreased ice time, that these "savvy" veterans are possibly a step behind the "up and coming" youthful generation. I personally, as a competent on-ice and video coach for a reputable organization, believe that these two veterans in question made way more mistakes than applaudable plays throughout the 2010 Olympics. Does this concur with analysts? Yes. Does this mean I am simply a parrot? No. Need substantial evidence? I will pass a few hours if necessary (albeit at the expense of the youth I coach) to analyze the first 3 games in order to give you an exact breakdown of all the defensive blunders and lost battles (great active sticks and lane shutdowns included, or lack thereof) so that you may see how you, as victims of the exact media influences you speak of, are as apt to repeat what you hear from analysts as much, or as little, as the next person.
Beans; I understand the indication that McGuire (one of hockey's worst commentators in history) may have led many "parrots" to believe that there has been a "changing of the guard" as he is known to make very general statements, differing from one period to the next, but for heaven's sake, please don't reduce the average hockey fan to an echo of McGuire. As for "moderators" upholding their duty, I have never seen someone make such disgraceful grammatical and syntactical errors as yourself. You speak of "understanding" as the key issue when posting an opinion; what exactly is your excuse when making several errors throughout your post, while at the same time reprimanding someone for making a basic error (even if it is simple to understand their point)? As I see it, you use the "guidelines" as means to deflect pressure when your opinion is not agreed with. Again, I would be glad to compile a compelling list of English faux-pas throughout your "moderator" history (at the expense of the kids I spend my valuable time coaching) to illustrate my point. However, I stick to the point at hand; you "moderators" may oppose the point that Neidermayer and Pronger had significantly poor performances based on personal opinions. That does not mean that anyone in opposition to your views regurgitate verbatim the views of analysts . Even if they think exactly what the "panel" says.
Sorry for the rant, but as a long time reader I feel that the average "poster" seems to get bulldozed even if their points seem valid. Again, respect for the moderators (or at least some of them) but for the sake of "occasional" visitors to the site, make it obvious that you have a sense of humility and not just a false sense of pride, entitlement, and superiority.
And yes, Neidemayer had a great game against the Germans, but that is after the point. |
|
|
|
n/a
deleted
4809 Posts |
Posted - 02/24/2010 : 04:47:38
|
The direction this thread has taken is unfortunate, but some people need to sharpen their reading comprehension.
Here is the direct quote that Willus made that has opened up a can of indignation and ire:
quote:
"Beans you're not alone. Pronger has not been bad. But because McKenzie and company go on like they do the parrots repeat the nonsense on forums like this. Pronger has also been the "nastiest" player on Canada easily. If he were any more so he would be in the box all game. Would people rather that? Unlikely."
That is not a personal attack in my humble opinion.
I realise it skates close to the line in that people who held the opinion that Pronger sucks might think that Willus thinks they are all just parroting commentator opinions . . . but it is still not a personal attack.
Putting myself in the shoes of the commenters here that posted opinions that were negative about Pronger - Hugh G Rection, Alex116, Irvine, and Ryan93 - myself, I would have simply stated that I didn't even know the opinions of the commentators since I don't have the sound on in between periods, and then outlined specifically what I found bad about Pronger's game.
All that being said, I can see that this discussion won't get much better, and will lock it to hopefully restore everyone's sense of rationality and sanity.
"Take off, eh?" - Bob and Doug |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
First Impressions Olympics Hockey 
Topic Locked
