| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| FutureKesler |
Posted - 05/18/2011 : 21:09:55
The Nux walloped SJ 7-3 in game 2, Any chance SJ can get back in this series? Or dare I say a S---p?
Ryan Kesler is a BEAST! |
| 40 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| Beans15 |
Posted - 05/24/2011 : 14:50:27
I never said that anything Eager, Clowe, or Thornton said was ok. But I also don't recall any of those guys calling anyone a "weasel" for simply having an opinion either.
And I have no problem saying that Vancouver has a very good chance to win the Cup this year. They are looking great and I am not sure if either Boston or Tampa can stop them. There is nothing stressful about it at all. As much as I do hate the Canucks and some people feel I have 'blinders' on, I do see reality. Do you??? |
| Guest4827 |
Posted - 05/24/2011 : 12:20:14
Beans... so taking shots at players in the media makes you a dbag, why arent you saying anything about clowe eager and thornton after the game when bieksa tuned up marleau...all 3 bitched and bitched to the media about bieksa calling him almost every name in the book, all bieksa did was respond to a comment wellwood mae about his team "being scared to win" but your $%#$ing blinders are on. Its ok we know you hate vancouver and this is all very stressful for you right now, cause you hate to admit it ....but you know its vancouvers year. |
| nuxfan |
Posted - 05/23/2011 : 09:41:28
quote:
Let's see 17 penalties today and the Nucks took 11? About the way it should be if the refs. weren't listening to the Nucks fans reacting to the dives in the Garage.
.
Sweep? They are now in SJ. Nuff said.
Marleau was in on 3 of the 4. Good move Bieksa.
Bieksa took three. The "beast" 2. Burrows had an off-night. Only got called once.
Niemi stopped 38. Lugnut louie stopped 34 and his save percentage is ..895.
And then game 4 was "opposite day"... |
| Beans15 |
Posted - 05/21/2011 : 13:00:16
quote:
Originally posted by fat_elvis_rocked
Nope, only a quick correction...it was the New Jersey Devils...not Washington.
I will do as you did, and bow out gracefully, no parting shots. You have your opinion and outlook and I appreciate that. Mine being somewhat contradictory is just that, my opinion.
Simple as that.
Yes, my bad. It was New Jersey. I even researched it to find the exact quote!! My bad.
Absolutely agree to disagree. If I offended you or anyone with 'my parting shots' than I apologize.
Back to the point in hand. I believe it was Nuxfans (or it might have been Alex ) who warned of Vancouver's inability to stop the SJ power play. Well, at one point last night, the Sharks had gone 5-6 in the series. I believe they are now overall 5-12 or something in that range.
I also gotta say I am shocked at how nasty the Sharks are playing. They have been very reckless and Vancouver had done a good job up until last night of not getting caught up in it. That McGinn hit was gross as was the Eager hit on Sedin in game 2. Game 4 will be very interested from that perspective.
|
| Guest9255 |
Posted - 05/21/2011 : 05:22:50
Don't worry if they get by San Jose, Boston will destroy them.
Seguin rules. |
| Guest4227 |
Posted - 05/21/2011 : 05:03:33
As a yankee fan I would rather see the Red Sox win, than this over confident, cocky bunch of never won anything ever team from Vanvouver. |
| Guest9179 |
Posted - 05/20/2011 : 23:39:04
quote:
Originally posted by Guest4178
I agree Alex – the Marleau-Bieksa fight could inspire the Sharks to come back hard in game three (and beyond). Look what it did to Pittsburgh in the 2009 playoffs, when they were up against Philadelphia. I'm not sure if I remember the facts accurately, but I seem to remember that Carcilo fought Maxime Talbot (which was not really a fair fight), and I recall this being a turning point in the Flyers-Penguins series.
It's all about the result though. If the Sharks do not come back in their series with the Canucks, the fight is a non-factor. And at the end of the day, there is enough inspiration for players and teams to compete, so isolating a fight (fair or not) is usually more fan chatter or speculation than anything else.
By the way, I'm wondering if Marleau was "inspired" to fight Bieksa because of comments made by Jeremy Roenick in the last playoff round, where Roenick called out Marleau, saying that he was "gutless" in his play?
Hmmm – gotta wonder if the Bieksa fight in game two inspired Marleau tonight? |
| shanghaibri |
Posted - 05/20/2011 : 21:46:55
Let's see 17 penalties today and the Nucks took 11? About the way it should be if the refs. weren't listening to the Nucks fans reacting to the dives in the Garage.
.
Sweep? They are now in SJ. Nuff said.
Marleau was in on 3 of the 4. Good move Bieksa.
Bieksa took three. The "beast" 2. Burrows had an off-night. Only got called once.
Niemi stopped 38. Lugnut louie stopped 34 and his save percentage is ..895. |
| fat_elvis_rocked |
Posted - 05/20/2011 : 21:35:51
Nope, only a quick correction...it was the New Jersey Devils...not Washington.
I will do as you did, and bow out gracefully, no parting shots. You have your opinion and outlook and I appreciate that. Mine being somewhat contradictory is just that, my opinion.
Simple as that. |
| Beans15 |
Posted - 05/20/2011 : 18:17:35
No problem:
1 - My point was Bieksa calling out an individual player and calling him a weasel makes him a d-bag. You respond with Wayne Gretzky making a comment toward the Washington Capitals when he called them a Mickey Mouse Organization. Just to clarify, this is the exact quote which was given to a report after the Oilers won 13-4 in Washington:
Well, it's time they got their act together, they're ruining the whole league. They had better stop running a Mickey Mouse organization and put somebody on the ice."
Gretzky also quickly stated his comments went to far.
Now, I don't know about you but I see the comments very differently. Gretzky making a statement about an organization and their futility is quite different than Bieksa called a former team mate a Weasel for saying he enjoyed his current team more as they are more mature and not so afraid of losing.
That is why I didn't comment. I didn't think I needed to explain the difference.
2 - You have now asked me on more that one occasion to not repeat myself, so I won't. Bieksa fighting Marleau but not Clowe or Eager tells me something and it obviously tells you something different.
3 - I brought up names like Yzerman and Sakic as they are known as 2 of the most honorable and honest players to ever play the game. Niether pulled any punches and spoke frankly but neither was disrespectful to a former team mate, opposition player, or anyone else involved in the game. I was trying to contract the statement of playing and speaking honestly. There is a way to do that without being disrespectful which is where the contrast of Sakic and Yzerman come in. Again, I didn't think I would have to explain this again.
Anything else you would like to know??
|
| fat_elvis_rocked |
Posted - 05/20/2011 : 16:22:21
I am not sure why you feel the need to reiterate what I did clearly understand the first time around Beans.I am only answering due to your offhanded addition of the honest tag in your post, so I have to somewhat assume you mean me,as well as others.
I understand that you never said he shouldn't fight Marleau, but what you did say was;
"Bieksa = D-Bag
What kind of guy drops the mitts with a star who hasn't fought in nearly 4 years but won't drop them with anyone who could actually give him a fight??"
I gave a contradictory list to that statement and you blew right by it with some reference to Domi and Probert. Not sure what that was. I stayed in the context of your comment.
You talk about the comment he made. That's all it takes to be considered a D-bag? A comment? You then used Yzerman and Sakic as supportives for your stance. I used Gretzky in rebuttal. You blew by that one too. Don't get me wrong, he could call my mother names and he'd still be Gretzky, minus a tooth perhaps, but still Gretzky.
You are absolutely right, you don't have to like it and it doesn't mean it's right, but it is what it is, if Bieksa's a D-bag for these incidents, he's far from the only one, and that would have to include a fair number of our Oilers from their glory days, and I am not ready to admit to that any time soon.
Your last couple lines about this being a regular occurance, I am assuming you mean he avoids the 'real' scrappers, like Eager and Scott, just makes me wonder again, if your hate for all things Canuck, is geting in the way of logic. Should he, as a top 4 defenceman on the Canucks, logging 20+ minutes a game, really be fighting the Eagers and Scotts?
I understood all the points you made, I just gave reasonable rebut to them. I welcome the same to mine. |
| Guest5890 |
Posted - 05/20/2011 : 14:00:00
quote:
Originally posted by Beans15But be very aware that the next time and every time after (because it happens often) when Bieksa in in a similar situation with a player who can actually hold their own, I will be there to comment on it.
I want to see St Louis fight Chara. |
| Beans15 |
Posted - 05/20/2011 : 13:39:09
Well, I thought I could bow out gracefully, but I can't. Let me try to clarifiy what I thought was were obvious points
1 - I never said Bieksa should not have fought Marleau. Marleau asked for everything he got. What I have issue with is Bieksa not dancing in the same situation with a guy that can actually defend himself.. If he is such a tough guy, why doesn't he fight with guys that are supposed to be as tough?? Where was he with Eager?? That's crap. If you are going to beat on the non-fighters, be prepared to fight the other guys too.
2 - A D-Bag move is calling out a specific person on the other team. Anyone here any one from Boston or Tampa call out anyone they have played all playoffs?? Anyone hear anyone other than the Sharks or Canucks call out anyone??? I am not at all saying the Sharks are faultless in this, but if someone things that Bieksa saying stuff like that is honest, that cool. But I take exception to anyone who says that is an honorable things to do.
3 - It is the playoffs and every advantage possible should be taken. If the Sharks are stupid enough to fall for it, they deserve everything they get. But it doesn't mean I have to like it and it doesn't make it right.
4 - Bieksa, who averages close to a fight ever 10 games fighting Marleau, who fights once every 250 games is laughable Slozo. You are dead on right. Marleau had no business dropping his mitts. Bieksa needs to defend himself there as Marleau did drop his gloves first. But be very aware that the next time and every time after (because it happens often) when Bieksa in in a similar situation with a player who can actually hold their own, I will be there to comment on it. |
| fat_elvis_rocked |
Posted - 05/20/2011 : 13:34:57
Thanks for your reasoned responses, it's refreshing to debate the points, even if my original intent is getting pushed out of it's .... well original intent.
I didn't mean to sound like I was implying that Bieksa purposefully goaded Marleau into a fight, and I see how my comments may have left that impression. I'll try to clarify.
The cross check he gave Marleau, was not dissimilar to what happens numerous times throughout a game, be it in front of the net, while the play is happening, or whether it is like I thought it was in this case, two players competing hard for space and positional play. Where it became strategically advantageous for Bieksa is when Patty decided to take it to the next level. I am not sure that was ever Bieksa's intent, but it is the way it ended up. It ended up being good strategy, perhaps by circumstance instead.
If the cross check he gave Marleau, is the only cause for him to be considered dirty, then I cannot argue it for that particular instance.
The initial bulk of the thread never mentioned that, more that he fought Marleau, then expanded to who he didn't fight, then expanded again in to comments he made.
I think if one searches long enough for fault, any of us can then be called D-bags for some transgression or another.
I only took the stance I did, because, in my opinion only, I find Bieksa to be a solid defenceman, who plays what I call and honest game(much to Beans' chagrin), in that he plays physical, and will fight if it's needed.
A 20+ minute defenceman, dropping the mitts with the likes of an Eager of Scott, would make no sense to me. That's not the difference between being honorable or not, that's avoiding a dumb play that would only hurt his team, not help.
I just found calling him a dirty player, or a D-bag, a little strong for what actually transpired, and wonder if it wasn't based on more on Canuck hate, than on reality.
|
| nuxfan |
Posted - 05/20/2011 : 13:22:10
quote:
The douche baggery is the way he instigated the fight. Crosschecking a leader and top player of the opposing team in the back for no reason is dirty. Do you disagree? You may argue that it is common place, you may say that the sharks are dirty too, you may say it was smart strategically, but none of this makes it any less dirty, and doesn't exactly move Bieksa any closer to a Lady Byng nomination.
So whats the point of this argument then? If your measure of "dirty" player is initiating some sort of stick contact with a player, then 90% of all NHL players should now be considered "dirty".
I'm assuming you watch hockey... Sticks are everywhere - shins, midsection, arms, back of legs, feet, pretty much anywhere except the head. Any time a player gets close to the opposing net he gets crosschecked, hacked, beat down. Players that initiate contact along the boards use their sticks for leverage, cross check in the lower back. Players trying to prevent another player from starting up ice get hacked, pulled. Using your stick at the edge of the rules is part of the game, and frankly, what Bieksa did to Marleau is entirely ordinary - nothing that didn't happen to other people, at other stages of a very close physical game. The only difference with this, is how Marleau REACTED to the check.
There have been many an article written in recent days regarding how this year's SJ team resembles previous year's VAN, and game 2 certainly had comparisons. I find it interesting how in last year's playoffs when CHI was able to goad the Sedin's and Kesler and Burrows into dumb penalties, they were considered masterful at getting under the skin of the Canucks and getting them away from their game. This year, VAN does the same thing to SJ and they're a bunch of douchebags and dirty players that don't treat the skill players with decency and respect. |
| Guest3157 |
Posted - 05/20/2011 : 12:41:06
I wasn't equating a head shot to a crosscheck at all. I was equating the arguments. My entire argument was that whether or not Bieksa's actions were good strategically is entirely irrelevant as to whether he is a dirty player/member of the douche bag brigade. Taking a head shot at Crosby and taking arguably the best player in the game out of a series would undoubtedly be a good strategical move, but that doesn't mean that the player that did this was not a dirty douche bag. Kicking a guy when he's down and getting away with it may be smart strategically but is a dirty douche-move. And crosschecking a top player on the opposing team to instigate a retaliatory penalty is a dirty douche move.
Now notice that I am not saying that crosschecking is equal to a head shot, both of which are not equal to kicking someone while they are down. I'm saying that they are all dirty plays. Just like if I said that 2 and 3 are both numbers, that doesn't mean that I think 2 = 3.
So to answer your questions:
"How does a cross check like the one Bieksa gave Marleau equate to a head shot? ".
-It doesn't, never said it did.
"How is drawing one of the opponents top forwards in to a penalty, not a good strategical move, especially in the Conference finals?"
-It surely is a good strategical move, I never said it wasn't. But that is entirely irrelevant to determining whether Bieksa is a dirty player.
"How does this play compare in any way ,shape, or form to an Avery type play?"
-Isn't Avery's style of play to be an instigator, trying to entice opposing players to take penalties against him? Isn't that the exact motivation that you have attributed to Bieksa?
"How exactly is Bieksa a D-bag, when he took a pretty decent shot from Marleau, and then finished what Patty started?"
-I don't think anyone is saying Bieksa should have just stood like a punching bag and allowed marleau to pummel him. The douche baggery is the way he instigated the fight. Crosschecking a leader and top player of the opposing team in the back for no reason is dirty. Do you disagree? You may argue that it is common place, you may say that the sharks are dirty too, you may say it was smart strategically, but none of this makes it any less dirty, and doesn't exactly move Bieksa any closer to a Lady Byng nomination.
I'm not saying that Bieksa is or isn't a pervasively dirty player, but if someone were to say that he is and pointed to this incident as an example, I for one would not take issue with the example. Bieksa instigated a fight against a top player on the Sharks that is not known by any stretch for his fighting prowess. That is a douche bag move. |
| nuxfan |
Posted - 05/20/2011 : 10:29:34
quote:
What's interesting to me, is I see at the 25 second mark, Marleau giving Bieksa a little nod as the linesmen separate them, that to me anyways, says that Marleau knew exactly what had happened.
You may also note, at the 35 second mark as they are showing the separation in slomo... Bieksa gives Marleau a little pat on the face and a couple of pats on the shoulder, to me signifiying "good job" and a sign of respect. Marleau knew what he was doing, and Bieksa also knew what Marleau was doing, and IMO knew that Marleau was outside his comfort zone with that fight but he did it to try and get his team into things, for which Marleau gets respect. |
| fat_elvis_rocked |
Posted - 05/20/2011 : 10:10:56
quote:
Originally posted by Guest3157
You see the problem is that you seem to assert that if what Bieksa did was smart strategically, then somehow that means he isn't a douche bag. I would argue that Bieksa crosschecking Marleau in the back with the intent to instigate some sort of retaliation is exactly the type of dirty play that would make someone like Beans call him a douche bag. Just like we wouldn't argue that Avery isn't a douche bag because his antics get under players' skin, and might throw them off their game or instigate retaliatory acts. It is exactly these kind of intentions that make the player dirty and draw the ire of anybody that doesn't happen to be a fan of the team.
Say hypothetically Crosby is in the playoffs and somebody takes a head shot at him with the intent to injure. In the face of condemnation, would it be fair to say: "Hey, its a smart hockey move, this is the playoffs, you have to do what you can to get ahead"?
I'm going to provide a clip, just so I can clarify what I see as happening, not gospel by any means, but what I see happening.
http://youtu.be/wHnIn77NDPk
In the two angles provided, Marleau fights for position with Bieksa while the puck is in the corner. I see Marleau move in to Bieksa and tie him up. I then see Bieksa give Marleau the cross check as they slightly separate.
Now maybe this is where the contentions come in, but what I then see is Marleau retaliate to the cross check, with his own crosscheck, where they then hack away at each other for a second, Bieksa with another crosscheck and Marleau with the ever popular 'let me try spear you in the gonads'.
Marleau then arguably but by all accounts, drops his gloves first, then fairly, gets in the 1st punch. How is that not a green light for Bieksa to go?
If Marleau had simply backed off that exchange, then maybe Bieksa would have had to answer the bell with someone more acclimated to do what Marleau did, but instead he chose to fight. That's where I have the issue with posters laying all the blame on Bieksa..
What's interesting to me, is I see at the 25 second mark, Marleau giving Bieksa a little nod as the linesmen separate them, that to me anyways, says that Marleau knew exactly what had happened.
How exactly is Bieksa a D-bag, when he took a pretty decent shot from Marleau, and then finished what Patty started?
How does a cross check like the one Bieksa gave Marleau equate to a head shot? SSStttrrreettcchhiiinnnggg things a bit there, no?
How is drawing one of the opponents top forwards in to a penalty, not a good strategical move, especially in the Conference finals?
How does this play compare in any way ,shape, or form to an Avery type play?
Marleau himself was quoted;
"It was just a heat of the moment kind of thing and that happens in hockey," he said. "We just kind of exchanged shots and then kind of decided to drop the gloves, but I think at that point we were still in it, trying to get our game going. I haven't fought too many times, but I know when to drop my gloves. It was my decision to."
**http://www.foxnews.com/sports/2011/05/19/marleau-bieksa-scrap-causes-stir/**
Again, hate if you want, that's your opinion, but bring something relevant if you want to debate it, I think I have.
|
| Guest3157 |
Posted - 05/20/2011 : 09:34:27
You see the problem is that you seem to assert that if what Bieksa did was smart strategically, then somehow that means he isn't a douche bag. I would argue that Bieksa crosschecking Marleau in the back with the intent to instigate some sort of retaliation is exactly the type of dirty play that would make someone like Beans call him a douche bag. Just like we wouldn't argue that Avery isn't a douche bag because his antics get under players' skin, and might throw them off their game or instigate retaliatory acts. It is exactly these kind of intentions that make the player dirty and draw the ire of anybody that doesn't happen to be a fan of the team.
Say hypothetically Crosby is in the playoffs and somebody takes a head shot at him with the intent to injure. In the face of condemnation, would it be fair to say: "Hey, its a smart hockey move, this is the playoffs, you have to do what you can to get ahead"? |
| n/a |
Posted - 05/20/2011 : 09:09:44
About as graceful as the snow showers that San Jose has now become famous for, almost every one of their forwards - those with bad reputations and those without them - has employed this. And San Jose has been warned a couple of times on it - I predict a penalty for it in the third game, in fact, just a matter of time.
No comments on that? Because saying Wellwood is a weasel (IMHO, on the ice, yeah - he is a bit of a weasel, can't argue that) off the ice is being a lot less of a douchebag than AS A TEAM employing the strategy of snow spraying the goalies on every single rush to the net.
It's the playoffs . . . and every inch you can gain, any mental edge - you take it. There are no rules, as long as you aren't penalised for it, it's all fair game. This is professional sports at its highest level . . . to call out one of the teams involved and nitpick their infractions is absolutely ludicrous if you're not going to compare the other teams many infractions as well.
No matter what, San Jose is in trouble. They need to learn how to contain Vancouver once they reach the third period, when in each game the Canucks have clearly outplayed and outchanced them. Yeah, they are headed home . . . but that has meant diddly squat this playoffs save for the game 7s, and the 'Nucks are a great road team.
And lastly . . . it is utterly laughable that Bieksa fighting Marleau (who was a willing combatant, doesn't matter who started it) is seen as him "picking on a guy who almost never fights", when he is the marginally smaller guy, and certainly no goon. Utterly. Laughable.
No, I had thought this series was going to be a lot closer, but I think it might only go 5 at most the way it's gone . . . San Jose can't keep up for three periods, and some of their defence is really getting exposed.
"Take off, eh?" - Bob and Doug |
| fat_elvis_rocked |
Posted - 05/20/2011 : 08:20:26
quote:
Originally posted by Beans15
I am going to gracefully bow out of this one. It's has become obvious that people are not going to see each others points. If Bieksa called specific individuals names in public is considers honest (like the way he plays) and Bieksa dropping the gloves with guys like Marleau and Stalberg in these play-offs but not dancing with guys like Eager and Scott, that's fine. If people can not see the difference between honor and honestly, that too is fine.
No point in wasting anyone else's time.
Wow Beans, I am not sure why you added the 'gracefully' part at the beginning of this post. You are being anything but. Thre are enough parting shots in this 8 liner to make Marleau feel like the thumping Bieksa gave him was naught more than a gentle spanking!
Oh, and regarding said parting shots, and your contention that people aren't seeing what's to see.....right back at ya! |
| Alex116 |
Posted - 05/20/2011 : 07:55:18
quote:
Originally posted by shanghaibri
Kesler is a legitimate fourth liner. Bieksa is a goon. Lugnuts Louie, aka 10 million dollar man is a fraud, Vancouver is where goalies go to die! They haven't even been to San Jose yet!
Feel free to "Un-sign-up" anytime! If you can't figure out how to do it, please email Admin.  |
| Guest8605 |
Posted - 05/20/2011 : 07:42:00
quote:
Originally posted by Beans15
I am going to gracefully bow out of this one. It's has become obvious that people are not going to see each others points. If Bieksa called specific individuals names in public is considers honest (like the way he plays) and Bieksa dropping the gloves with guys like Marleau and Stalberg in these play-offs but not dancing with guys like Eager and Scott, that's fine. If people can not see the difference between honor and honestly, that too is fine.
No point in wasting anyone else's time.
Are you kidding me?
Bieksa 6'1, 198
Marleau 6'2 200
Stalberg 6'3 209
Ben Eager 6'2 235
John Scott 6'8 258
2 inches and 37 pounds of muscle is hardly anything to laugh at. But you want him to dance with someone that has 7 inches and 60 pounds on him???
Yes Marleau dropped the gloves.
Yes Bieksa and Marleau were checking and poking and slashing prior to that.
But even before that, how many times did Clowe high stick someone?
How many times does Thornton get to slash Kesler? |
| nuxfan |
Posted - 05/20/2011 : 07:05:45
quote:
Kesler is a legitimate fourth liner. Bieksa is a goon. Lugnuts Louie, aka 10 million dollar man is a fraud, Vancouver is where goalies go to die! They haven't even been to San Jose yet!
erm, welcome to the board shanghaibri, and...thank you for your valuable and level-headed insight into the Canucks team. |
| Beans15 |
Posted - 05/20/2011 : 06:12:20
I am going to gracefully bow out of this one. It's has become obvious that people are not going to see each others points. If Bieksa called specific individuals names in public is considers honest (like the way he plays) and Bieksa dropping the gloves with guys like Marleau and Stalberg in these play-offs but not dancing with guys like Eager and Scott, that's fine. If people can not see the difference between honor and honestly, that too is fine.
No point in wasting anyone else's time. |
| shanghaibri |
Posted - 05/20/2011 : 02:14:31
Kesler is a legitimate fourth liner. Bieksa is a goon. Lugnuts Louie, aka 10 million dollar man is a fraud, Vancouver is where goalies go to die! They haven't even been to San Jose yet!
|
| Alex116 |
Posted - 05/20/2011 : 01:11:09
quote:
Originally posted by fat_elvis_rocked
PS. Geez.....if I don't stop sounding like I got a man crush on Bieksa, Alex and Nux are gonna start thinking I like the Canuckleheads!
FER....Plans for the long weekend? Heading up to my cabin in the interior with some friends. Would love to bring a date! 
All kidding aside, great article you provided, but i have to argue with the writer, why in the world would Bieksa consider "whispering in a guy's ear" at that point in time?? Maybe, just maybe, in a reg season game, but when you're playing the same guys two nights later? F'em! Pummel the poor sap!!!
Let's face it, what this comes down to is Canucks fans, vs Canucks HATERS and then throw in the mix of the sane (such as FER) who can see both sides. Aside from that, we're gonna argue till it's done. I get it! I'm not sweatin' it! BUT, i certainly won't back down from the insanity! |
| nuxfan |
Posted - 05/19/2011 : 22:35:46
quote:
Alex and Nux are gonna start thinking I like the Canuckleheads!
Rest assured, you will never be mistaken as a Canucks fan. But I think I do see the beginnings of a little man-crush on Bieksa, so cute! 
quote:
Did Marleau have to drop his gloves in response? No, and as much as some talk of him trying to fire up his team and blah, blah, blah, the fact remains, it ended up being a bad decision both for his skull, because it rattled his brain, and for Eager, who showed he may not have one.
This is really what it boils down to for me as well. Bieksa and Marleau got into an elevated situation. Starts with a cross check from Bieksa, continues with some back and forth low leg slashing and a stare down, maybe some words are thrown. In other words - a pretty simple interchange in an interchange-filled game, to this point really nothing out of the ordinary has happened folks, its been happening in every game all playoffs long.
At that point - Marleau can simply turn away and continue playing. I'm sure Bieksa thought thats how it would go, because he knows Marleau is not a fighter. But honestly, once Marleau drops the gloves and initiates a fight, what does anyone think Bieksa is going to do in response? |
| fat_elvis_rocked |
Posted - 05/19/2011 : 22:12:43
Just a quick aside, there is an article in Edmonton journal, somewhat, in a roundabout way, supporting the Bieksa haters ideas that Bieksa shouldn't have punched out Marleau and he 'broke the code'.
http://blogs.edmontonjournal.com/2011/05/19/bieksa-broke-the-fighters-code-against-marleau/
I am sure Jim Matheson feels he's making a valid point, but at this time of the year, and in a series this close to the prize? It just sounds lame. |
| fat_elvis_rocked |
Posted - 05/19/2011 : 22:06:48
Guest4988,
There is no denying that Bieksa initiated the incident with Marleau, he did give him a cross-check, inarguable.
The question is why? Maybe to intiate a retaliatory response from one of the Sharks' stars.....hmmmm.
Did Marleau have to drop his gloves in response? No, and as much as some talk of him trying to fire up his team and blah, blah, blah, the fact remains, it ended up being a bad decision both for his skull, because it rattled his brain, and for Eager, who showed he may not have one.
This is the Conference finals of the Stanley Cup playoffs, talk all you want about lack of honor, and D-baggery, etc. etc., but there is obviously more to the games at this level, than what happens on the ice. This is not the regular season, and players will use any advantage to gain an edge, period.
Why will none of the Bieksa haters debate my reasoning for what Bieksa did?
Stalberg was running around taking liberties, any player who is running around throwing the body like he did in that short sequence is going to find themselves in that same situation, that's the game, you try to run around throwing the body, someone is going to call you on it, simple.
Bieksa goaded Marleau into making a bad play, and it went further than I would think even he thought it would. Do any of you really believe he thought Marleau, who as it was pointed out, hasn't fought in 4 years, would actually drop his gloves like he did? That's a freebie for Bieksa, and for him to not take advantage of it, in such an important series, would be ridiculous. Regular season, different story.
And the comments? Is Bieksa the only player in the playoffs to use the media to stir things up? I don't think so by any means.
Eager got more airtime than playing time from all this, Bolland and Burish couldn't stop talking smack any chance they got last year, and according to some posters ideology, that would mean that they D-bagged their way to a Stanley Cup ring then. Let's keep it a little more real here, than he said 'bad' things, please.
I'll say it again, hate whoever you want, but if you want to debate your opinon, bring something tangible.
PS. Geez.....if I don't stop sounding like I got a man crush on Bieksa, Alex and Nux are gonna start thinking I like the Canuckleheads! |
| FutureKesler |
Posted - 05/19/2011 : 22:03:50
quote:
Originally posted by Guest4827
this sums up this series : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W8GaDuCvYbE
Yup, that sums it up.
Ryan Kesler is a BEAST! |
| Guest4827 |
Posted - 05/19/2011 : 19:31:29
this sums up this series : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W8GaDuCvYbE |
| Guest4988 |
Posted - 05/19/2011 : 19:03:13
OK Beans, I have to help you out here. I agree 100% with you on your list of hateful players.....I won't call them d-bags, but certainly dirty & sneaky. That lists includes in no particular order, Burrows, Torres, Lapierre, Bieksa & Kesler. I also agree that Kesler has matured a lot and he's not nearly as bad as he used to be. I'm not big on Vigneau either as a coach. Anyway, in my opinion, Bieksa cross-checked Marleau and that started the whole thing last night. For the posters to say that Marleau "started" it all is ridiculous and the fact that Bieksa fought one of the Sharks stars incensed Eager and the rest of San Jose. I admit that Eager went too far, but Bieksa initiated everything. Also, in the Bieksa attack on another non-fighter Victor Stalberg of Chicago, I guess his feelings were hurt because Stalberg knocked Bieksa over with a clean check! Chicago were trouncing Vancouver in the game, so Bieksa decided to take out his frustrations by pounding on Stalberg. Bieksa also had the gall to say that John Scott of Chicago only fights lesser-lights, ( which is also not true ) yet he fights Marleau & Stalberg. The guy is a hypocrite-- he is a good defenceman, but very hateful. I also agree that his comment on Wellwood was classless too. It's guys like Bieksa and the other four Canucks mentioned along with the bias of the Canadian media ( I'm from Canada by the way ) such as HNIC, TSN & Sportsnet that makes me root against Vancouver. It doesn't matter if they're based in Canada, I'd rather root for teams with many Canadian-born players than a team loaded with non-Canadian players like the Canucks. |
| Guest0517 |
Posted - 05/19/2011 : 18:03:20
what a "gutless" move by marleau to fight bieksa |
| Alex116 |
Posted - 05/19/2011 : 17:15:28
quote:
Originally posted by Guest6604
Marleau has an inch and 20 pounds on Bieksa.
I hardly say that was an unfair fight for him, which he initiated.
It's a good point, but fact is, Marleau's not considered a fighter! His last fight was 4 years ago! Bieksa fights approx 3-5 times a season and is known to be that type of guy.
IF Bieksa had initiated it, i could see people making a big deal about it, but it didn't quite go that way! |
| Guest6604 |
Posted - 05/19/2011 : 16:36:37
Marleau has an inch and 20 pounds on Bieksa.
I hardly say that was an unfair fight for him, which he initiated. |
| Guest4178 |
Posted - 05/19/2011 : 16:32:35
I agree Alex – the Marleau-Bieksa fight could inspire the Sharks to come back hard in game three (and beyond). Look what it did to Pittsburgh in the 2009 playoffs, when they were up against Philadelphia. I'm not sure if I remember the facts accurately, but I seem to remember that Carcilo fought Maxime Talbot (which was not really a fair fight), and I recall this being a turning point in the Flyers-Penguins series.
It's all about the result though. If the Sharks do not come back in their series with the Canucks, the fight is a non-factor. And at the end of the day, there is enough inspiration for players and teams to compete, so isolating a fight (fair or not) is usually more fan chatter or speculation than anything else.
By the way, I'm wondering if Marleau was "inspired" to fight Bieksa because of comments made by Jeremy Roenick in the last playoff round, where Roenick called out Marleau, saying that he was "gutless" in his play? |
| Alex116 |
Posted - 05/19/2011 : 16:13:06
Funny thing about the Marleau incident is he may have intentionally brought it on himself. Look at it this way, if he lucked out and landed a beauty shot (like Kotsopolous did to Bieksa) and stung him, he'd surely inspire his team! If he holds his own, he inspires his team! If he gets beat, like he did, he inspires his team! Maybe the inspiration is a little different, but if i'm his team mate and i see him standing up to Bieksa, i realize i gotta start "bring'in' it'!
Just imagine if SJ comes out and wins handily tomorrow night with one of their better efforts and then goes on to take the series. He could get a grand total of 0 more points, and Marleau would still be considered the hero for supplying the turning point?
Maybe Patty Marleau has fooled everyone? |
| fat_elvis_rocked |
Posted - 05/19/2011 : 15:48:39
If I was to consider comparing Bieksa to Yzerman or Sakic you are exactly right......that is what you just did, isn't it?
The only point I am trying to exasperatingly? make, is that 2 incidents, and now apparently, one comment(which has naught to do with anything in regards to your initial point), do not deter from my perception that Bieksa plays an honest game. He doesn't cheap shot,(unless you call that minor irritation of a cross check, given to successfully distract a 1st line player and draw him into a penalty, which would be a stretch), a dirty play.
He does fight other fighters, he does stand up for teammates, so they don't get Marleau'd. He does take it upon himself to set a tone for a player who starts running around taking physical liberties(Stalberg), and on top of all that, he is still a very, very effective player at his position.
Yet he is still, in your words, a D-bag? Because he called someone a 'weasel'? Is,(insert angelic chorus here), The Great One,(fade from angelic chorus here), a D-bag because he, in a public forum, called an entire organization weasels??,(okay it was Mickey Mouse, but close enough to use as a reference ).
I would think calling someone a D-bag is worse, in any forum, public or not.
Again, hate away, but don't use such lame examples as justification. |
| Beans15 |
Posted - 05/19/2011 : 12:47:25
Honestly and making a D-bag statement are two very different things. Did you ever hear Steve Yzerman call anyone a weasel?? What was said after the Draper/Lemieux saga when Yzerman was the captain?? What about Joe Sakic??? Ever here him say anything like that??
Honesty maybe. Honorable? Not by a long shot. |
|
|
