Pat Quinn: the bad old days

Robin Brownlee
October 09 2009 03:34PM

It looks like Pat Quinn's trip down memory lane after Thursday's 4-3 shootout loss to the Calgary Flames has cost the Edmonton Oilers coach $10,000 by way of a fine from the NHL. Who says talk is cheap?

In this case, Quinn didn't nearly get his money's worth for waxing nostalgic about the bad old days of vigilante justice after Jarome Iginla took Sheldon Souray into the end boards at Rexall Place.

Apparently, a fistfight initiated by captain Ethan Moreau as retribution for the play wasn't sufficient retribution in the eyes of the 66-year-old Oilers coach, who gave fist-pumping mouth-breathers everywhere something to "Hell, ya" about with his post-game $10,000 take on what unfolded.

Quinn said:

"I don't understand the players of today ... if that had happened in my era, the player would have been hit over the head with a stick right afterwards. That's the way you dealt with things, in the era I come from, you deal dirt with dirt. They won't let the vigilante stuff ... why give him the honour of a fistfight?"

 Pardon?  

Over the top

I get the from-the-gut sentiment that prompted Quinn to say what he did, especially when emotions remain high right after a disappointing loss, but he chose his words badly, to say the least.

I like a good punch-up as much as anybody, but anything that can even be loosely interpreted as justifying having any player -- even when framed as "back in the day" -- swing his stick at the head of another player can't be allowed to slide by. That doesn't belong in the game. Never has. Never will.

It's OK to go Wayne Maki on somebody? Really? It's OK to have somebody convulsing on the ice like Ted Green did after Maki clubbed him in a stick-swinging battle? I think not. I know not. How about you?

I have a lot of respect for Quinn, and I'm old enough to be an old-school guy, but the old coach is flat-out wrong to suggest anything more than what Moreau did, very badly mind you, Thursday was warranted as retribution for Iginla's hit.

Pay the price

When a play unfolds as the situation with Iginla and Souray did, there's nothing wrong, within the framework of what's acceptable in the NHL, for Moreau to go looking for Iginla as he did.

The problem, as I see it, Thursday, is Moreau didn't get the job done. Had he punched Iginla bloody in a toe-to-toe exchange, would Quinn have said what he said? Would we be talking about this today? I think not.

You can try to read motive into Iginla's hit if you must, but I believe the Calgary captain when he says he didn't mean for it to happen the way it did. Iginla is as honest a player as there is in the league and always has been. If he wasn't, he would've beat the hell out of Moreau when the gloves came off instead of holding up when Moreau lost his balance and fell.

Like I said, I get the sentiment Quinn expressed, but it's a leap in logic I'm not willing to accept to suggest bringing a club into the payback equation is in any way justified. Not in the bad old days. Not now.

-- Listen to Robin Brownlee every Wednesday and Thursday from 4 to 6 p.m. on Just A Game with Jason Gregor on TEAM 1260.

Aceb4a1816f5fa09879a023b07d1a9b4
A sports writer since 1983, including stints at The Edmonton Journal and The Sun 1989-2007, I happily co-host the Jason Gregor Show on TSN 1260 twice a week and write when so inclined. Have the best damn lawn on the internet. Most important, I am Sam's dad. Follow me on Twitter at Robin_Brownlee. Or don't.
Avatar
#101 Kingsblade
October 10 2009, 11:23AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props
RossCreekNation wrote:

Oh... so just because I'm a Flames fan and Deans or Dakin or Ender or OBjr and so on are Oiler fans, they shouldn't take their blinders off and make a fair assessment of things? Only a Flames fan should be defending Iggy... and strictly because they're a Flames fan? I'm not so blind as to defend any Flames player 100% at all costs. So why should they be?

Hockey is a fast game. That type of play happens every game, every period for that matter. Iginla did not trip him purposely. Are you responsible for your own stick at all times - yes. Which is why he got a penalty. For christ sakes Iginla went into the boards face/head first too. It was an ugly looking play and my initial reaction was OUCH as I thought BOTH players could be hurt badly. It was unfortunate, but what do you want to see? He got a penalty and he had to fight because of it.

Had to fight? That was probably Iginla's favorite part of the game.

Are you saying that it was ok because he fell too? I doubt it.

Iginla is a professional. Her didn't mean to trip him, but he stuck his stick in there when he knew that tripping Souray at that time would be very dangerous.

You guys love to talk about how he let up and tried to soften the the impact for Souray, but that simple fact is proof that Iginla knew it was a dangerous play.

He didn't mean to hurt him, but he made a play he knew could hurt him. That isn't all that much better as far as I'm concerned.

Avatar
#102 Chaz
October 10 2009, 11:24AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props
Paq Twinn wrote:

@Chaz I totally agree that "touch" icing is as dumb as bench clearing brawls. There's no place for either in todays game. As far as excitment goes, I like goals and scoring chances, and I can't even think of a goal being scored or a scoring chance occurring "because" of touch icing. However if it was no-touch icing there would be a face-off in the offensive zone, automatic scoring chance if the face-off is won. These ARE professionals, why do they need a short-cut like icing the puck when they get into trouble in their own zone. Likewise why punish a team that has sustained pressure on their oponents only to have to skate back hard and risk severe injury. Its time to bring in no-touch icing. That's how I see it any way.

I don't follow. In No-touch icing, the team who ices the puck still has the faceoff back in their end.

Avatar
#103 Chris.
October 10 2009, 11:26AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props
RossCreekNation wrote:

Kingsblade wrote:

How is that unrealistic? What is even less realistic is believing that he had no idea where his stick was. These are professional hockey players, and at this point if they cannot control their stick they have no business playing the game and risking everyone around them.

~Yeah, you are right... from now on, every player that gets a penalty for careless use of a stick should hereby forevermore be banished from the league~

No. Don't be silly... just soundly clubbed on the head. That'll do.

Avatar
#104 Kingsblade
October 10 2009, 11:28AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props
Deans wrote:

I also don't think that Ignla shoud be discouraged from future 'carelessness'

So it is ok for him to put his stick wherever he likes? Right - better to just ignore it and hope that next time nobody gets hurt even worse.

AS I said in my post to Ross Creek - He knew it was dangerous for Souray to go down in that situation. He put his stick between his legs anyways. That should be discouraged.

Players need to respect one another. Putting a guy in a dangerous position is not respectful, even if you really didn't want him to actually get hurt.

Avatar
#105 RossCreekNation
October 10 2009, 11:29AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

@Chris.

Now who's being silly Chris... that would be careless use of a stick, meaning the sound clubbings to the head would go on for eternity... like one divided by three... ;-)

Avatar
#106 Deans
October 10 2009, 11:29AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

Ya I dont think he knew it was dangerous, I dont think he had the time to accurately make that decision.

Avatar
#107 Paq Twinn
October 10 2009, 11:35AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

@chaz Exactly. The team icing the puck doesn't get a break, they have the face-off in their own end, with tired players on the ice.

Avatar
#108 Kingsblade
October 10 2009, 11:36AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props
RossCreekNation wrote:

~From now on, Iginla has decided he won't put his stick on the ice in case it accidentally comes in contact with someone's skate~

Awesome triple post.

Context matters. You inane sarcastic remarks simply don't apply.

How shall I respond.

1. My point was that players at that level have better control of their sticks than you guys are claiming. If they didn't they wouldn't be in the NHL.

2. I have repeatedly stated that I agree Iginla didn't want to hurt him. He just put him is a position where he had a pretty good chance of getting hurt. The fact that Iginla tried to let up shows exactly how dangerous he knew it was.

3. My problem isn't that he tripped somebody, my problem is that he tripped somebody, accidentally or not, at a time when it was extremely dangerous to do so.

The problem I really have with your responses here is the simple fact that you apparently have zero interest in discussing what I actually said. Not a single one of those three responses related in any way. If all you want to do is blow down straw men then this discussion is pointless.

Avatar
#109 RossCreekNation
October 10 2009, 11:40AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

Boys, watch the play again. The replay shows Souray's skate vibrating up and down as he was going into the boards prior to being touched by the stick. Iginla has 1 hand on his stick. Is there such thing as a vicious & malicious 1 hand trips. I think Souray was goin down no matter what. Looks more like he's losing an edge than anything.

Avatar
#110 Deans
October 10 2009, 11:42AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

@Kingsblade

I feel that I have responded to your posts fairly. I just see things differently. I get your points, you are not out to lunch. I just don't share your views.

Avatar
#111 Kingsblade
October 10 2009, 11:43AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props
Deans wrote:

Ya I dont think he knew it was dangerous, I dont think he had the time to accurately make that decision.

Really?

So are you claiming that a guy who is one of the top hockey players in the world was surprised to discover that tripping a guy who is skating full tilt towards the boards was dangerous?

Avatar
#112 RossCreekNation
October 10 2009, 11:45AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

@Kingsblade

Okay... so what do you want to see happen? 5 minute major for tripping? Game misconduct? Suspension? Brawl/beatdown? ~Tire iron to the knee? Seriously though, what resolution would you like to have seen?

Avatar
#113 Kingsblade
October 10 2009, 11:46AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props
Deans wrote:

I feel that I have responded to your posts fairly. I just see things differently. I get your points, you are not out to lunch. I just don't share your views.

You have responded fairly, I don't question that. I think maybe you are responding to my post directed at Ross Creek here or something.

Avatar
#114 Oil Kings 'n' Pretty Things
October 10 2009, 11:50AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props
RossCreekNation wrote:

Okay... so what do you want to see happen? 5 minute major for tripping? Game misconduct? Suspension? Brawl/beatdown? ~Tire iron to the knee? Seriously though, what resolution would you like to have seen?

Wouldn't it be appropriate to do the double minor like they do on high sticks that draw blood? Seems like a roughly equivalent end-result. The party responsible didn't intend to seriously injure, but that was the end result.

Avatar
#115 RossCreekNation
October 10 2009, 11:52AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

@Oil Kings 'n' Pretty Things

Okay, fair enough... so they call a double minor instead and then everyone is going to be happy? Quinn? The fans? Kingsblade? A double minor ends this ridiculous series of posts? I'm in.

Avatar
#116 Deans
October 10 2009, 11:54AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

@Kingsblade

Yes I don't think he had the time to access the situation. If he had his stick a half cm away from Souray's skate maybe this doesnt happen. But Iginla had to think about countless things like checking Souray, gettting the puck, finding his teamates after he retrived the puck, skating fast ect. He had to make these decsions in less then a second. It is understandable that he would place his stick a couple of cms too far when you consider all of these things. Just because Iginla is a world class player doesnt mean that he is a safety expert. I highly doubt that he has ever practiced this kind of scenerio. Being a 100% safe player isnt part of the job description, therefore we cant expect Iginla to automatically know where exactly the 'safe' place to put his stick would be, especially considering that the difference between safe and unsafe is probably less then a cm.

Avatar
#117 TonyT
October 10 2009, 11:56AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

I like Quinn BECAUSE he's the head coach of the Oilers, and for that I support him. But, he has a history of these types of comments (i.e. when Tucker was hit in the playoffs), we shouldn't be the least surprised. He wants his teams to play physical and for this early season we've been treated to that, so I don't really understand why anyone would be surprised.

Avatar
#118 Kingsblade
October 10 2009, 11:56AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props
RossCreekNation wrote:

Okay... so what do you want to see happen? 5 minute major for tripping? Game misconduct? Suspension? Brawl/beatdown? ~Tire iron to the knee? Seriously though, what resolution would you like to have seen?

There are a few decent options. The point is to at least respond in a way he wouldn't enjoy the way he probably enjoyed fighting Moreau. What would I personally suggest?

They could pay special attention physically to him as a team for the rest of the game. They did not. In fact he spent most of the game completely untouched.

In addition, because it's Iginla, you have to make sure that he knows he caused difficulties for teammates. He wouldn't like that. Run Kipprusoff a couple times and maybe take an instigator making another Flame fight who won't like it.

I don't recall ever suggesting something dangerous to his health. Just something that he won't enjoy.

Avatar
#119 Oil Kings 'n' Pretty Things
October 10 2009, 12:00PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props
RossCreekNation wrote:

Okay, fair enough... so they call a double minor instead and then everyone is going to be happy? Quinn? The fans? Kingsblade? A double minor ends this ridiculous series of posts? I'm in.

Eh, I'd be alright with it. I can't speak for these guys.

I believe it was a freak accident, and I've never seen Iginla really go out with malicious intent on anything, so I'm willing to give him the benefit of the doubt.

I still think he should be held responsible because I don't see that situation happening if Iginla wasn't there, but I don't think a suspension is appropriate you can't demonstrate an intent to injure.

Avatar
#120 Oil Kings 'n' Pretty Things
October 10 2009, 12:01PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

On a semi-related note, how did they deal with Moreau's stick-to-the-eye last year? Was that called as a double minor?

Avatar
#121 Kingsblade
October 10 2009, 12:02PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props
Deans wrote:

Yes I don't think he had the time to access the situation. If he had his stick a half cm away from Souray's skate maybe this doesnt happen. But Iginla had to think about countless things like checking Souray, gettting the puck, finding his teamates after he retrived the puck, skating fast ect. He had to make these decsions in less then a second. It is understandable that he would place his stick a couple of cms too far when you consider all of these things. Just because Iginla is a world class player doesnt mean that he is a safety expert. I highly doubt that he has ever practiced this kind of scenerio. Being a 100% safe player isnt part of the job description, therefore we cant expect Iginla to automatically know where exactly the 'safe' place to put his stick would be, especially considering that the difference between safe and unsafe is probably less then a cm.

Who said anything about trying to ensure 100% safety? Where does this come from?

He knew that Souray going down there would be dangerous. His actions alone evidenced that much.

IT seems unlikely that he did not know that putting his stick between a guys legs might trip him.

Obviously guys are going to get hurt. I never said that players much constantly seek the safest possible place for their stick, but they should be expected to not put their stick where it could be dangerous to another players safety.

Avatar
#122 Robin Brownlee
October 10 2009, 12:06PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props
Oil Kings 'n' Pretty Things wrote:

Wouldn't it be appropriate to do the double minor like they do on high sticks that draw blood? Seems like a roughly equivalent end-result. The party responsible didn't intend to seriously injure, but that was the end result.

I could go for the double-minor in any potential icing situation where contact from behind or use of the stick, intential or not, causes a player to fall into the end boards during a race for the puck. More penalty time, perhaps a major and game misconduct, if any injury is invloved. I also wouldn't be against allowing officials to review the play on the spot to make sure the right call is being made on a play like this one.

I don't want to take contact out of the game, but any little nudge or stickplay in the feet FROM BEHIND when a player is at high speed and close to the boards is a recipe for injury.

I was covering the WHL in 1987 when Brad Hornung of the Regina Pats was sent head-first into the boards by a cross-check at the goal line on a non-icing situation in a game against Moose Jaw. He's been paralyzed since. I don't need any further evidence to know how dangerous this kind of play is. I'll never forget it.

Avatar
#123 RossCreekNation
October 10 2009, 12:10PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

@Kingsblade

Kingsblade wrote

The problem I really have with your responses here is the simple fact that you apparently have zero interest in discussing what I actually said.

You're right, I don't have any interest in discussing. Admittedly, I ran a drive-by on you and your comments after reading the rubbish some of you wrote. Why argue with you about it? Deans for one, is doing a good enough job on his own. If I start coming at you with similar takes, is it going to change or sway your opinion? I think not, so why waste my time? Everybody has their opinion... the fact that some Oil fans are split on this tells me that this shouldn't be as big of an issue as some of you are making it out to be. If I sit here and defend Iginla endlessly, nobody listens/cares cuz 'he's just a Flames fan anyway'. So I let Oil fan take care of Oil fan. It would be a bit different if everyone on 'your' side was an Oiler fan and everyone on 'my' side was a Flames fan. Thats not the case. I've yet to see your mind be changed at the behest of someone else here at The Nation. Rarely does THAT happen amongst us. So no, in this instance I don't care to discuss with anyone saying there shoulda been hell to pay. Agree to disagree on this issue and leave it at that.

Avatar
#124 Lofty
October 10 2009, 12:22PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

The Flames and Oilers will play 3 or 4 more times and justice can be served at the right time during those games. Take the number and wait for the right situation.

Avatar
#125 Kingsblade
October 10 2009, 12:22PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

@RossCreekNation

You have no comment on my suggestion of what should have been done? You asked.

Avatar
#126 RossCreekNation
October 10 2009, 12:28PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

@Kingsblade

Actually, your comments make a lot of sense. So why didn't the Oil do this? Like I said, you received a drive-by based on so many other comments before yours, and your way of dealing with things would've been a lot more appropriate than suggestions of a dirty cheapshot for retribution. Make life miserable for him - yes. Hunt him down, elbow him, jump him from behind, etc - not so much.

Avatar
#127 RossCreekNation
October 10 2009, 12:38PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

@Kingsblade

And I don't think there was anything wrong with how Moreau handled it (with the exception of him not being able to stay upright). If it was a dirty cheapshot, then maybe talk of the goon going out and jumping him would've been more appropriate, but it was an accidental play. Should he recieve a penalty - sure. He knew the code. He knew their would be payback and when Moreau came, he obliged. Sure he likes to fight, but thats not a good trade-off from the Flames perspective. But Iginla "gave him the honour of seeking retribution". And I don't see anything wrong with that from Moreau's perspective.

As for Quinn's comments... everyone's been so busy yappin about this that his team hasn't had to answer the questions of losing the lead with seconds left on a goal that clearly was NOT a high stick.

Avatar
#128 Oil Kings 'n' Pretty Things
October 10 2009, 12:40PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props
RossCreekNation wrote:

And I don't think there was anything wrong with how Moreau handled it (with the exception of him not being able to stay upright). If it was a dirty cheapshot, then maybe talk of the goon going out and jumping him would've been more appropriate, but it was an accidental play. Should he recieve a penalty - sure. He knew the code. He knew their would be payback and when Moreau came, he obliged. Sure he likes to fight, but thats not a good trade-off from the Flames perspective. But Iginla "gave him the honour of seeking retribution". And I don't see anything wrong with that from Moreau's perspective.

As for Quinn's comments... everyone's been so busy yappin about this that his team hasn't had to answer the questions of losing the lead with seconds left on a goal that clearly was NOT a high stick.

The goal with 1.5 seconds left would be a non-issue if Hemsky poured on the gas and put the puck in the empty net.

Avatar
#129 Librarian Mike
October 10 2009, 12:41PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

So, we're still talking about this, eh?

With the amount of forensic analysis that's been done, the Youtube footage of that play is turning into the Zapruder film. Ha.

Avatar
#130 RossCreekNation
October 10 2009, 12:42PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

@Oil Kings 'n' Pretty Things

Exactly... but no one is talking about that. Tonight should be a good test for the Oil.

Avatar
#131 Oil Kings 'n' Pretty Things
October 10 2009, 12:45PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

I'm in GDB #4 withdrawal. Anybody know what the lines are going to be tonight? Who squares off with Laraque?

Avatar
#132 Librarian Mike
October 10 2009, 12:47PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props
Oil Kings 'n' Pretty Things wrote:

I'm in GDB #4 withdrawal. Anybody know what the lines are going to be tonight? Who squares off with Laraque?

Based on the last couple of days, it might be Quinn.

Avatar
#133 RossCreekNation
October 10 2009, 12:52PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

@Oil Kings 'n' Pretty Things

http://oilers.nhl.com/club/preview.htm?id=2009020060&navid=DL|EDM|home

The Oilers made a few small adjustments to their lineup in the morning skate. Sam Gagner skated on the second line between Patrick O'Sullivan and Ryan Stone. Mike Comrie moved to the right side to play with Dustin Penner and Gilbert Brule. Andrew Cogliano moved to line four alongside Ethan Moreau and Zack Stortini.

Jacques-Horcoff-Hemsky O'Sullivan-Gagner-Stone Penner-Brule-Comrie Moreau-Cogliano-Stortini

Avatar
#134 RossCreekNation
October 10 2009, 12:53PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

For easier reading...

Jacques-Horcoff-Hemsky

O'Sullivan-Gagner-Stone

Penner-Brule-Comrie

Moreau-Cogliano-Stortini

Avatar
#135 Oil Kings 'n' Pretty Things
October 10 2009, 12:56PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

@RossCreekNation

With the way Stone's been hitting, we'll probably see Laraque take exception at some point.

It still pains me to see Cogs on the fourth line (even if Quinn stresses that the line positioning is meaningless. He's still out skating with thecaptainethanmoreau and Zack Attack.

Avatar
#136 Lofty
October 10 2009, 01:10PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

I like the looks of Penner-Brule-Comrie. 2 goals for that line tonight, one for Penner and one for Comrie.

Avatar
#137 Oil Kings 'n' Pretty Things
October 10 2009, 01:12PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

@Lofty

I was just thinking about how I like the O'Sully/Gagner/Stone line. They're going to be difficult to play against if Gagner keeps playing with passion.

Avatar
#138 Word
October 10 2009, 01:16PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

@RossCreekNation

It wasn't a dirty play - It was a stupid play. Iginla clearly didn't use his head, which is surprising for a relatively bright guy. I don't think you can suspend for that unless it becomes a pattern of behavious, but at the same time it would be nice for the league to step up and take a vocal stance that it was a stupid play because of how potentially dangerous it was. The league should pretend it's considering suspension simply to make players in the future think about where their sticks are when they chase a player into the endboards.

As an aside, for such a big defensive core, why are the flames players the biggest bunch of poser cowards in the league? I've never in my life seen so many guys play "big" against little guys and refuse to back it up (Iginla excepted) against guys who're willing to tangle. If I was a Flames fan I would be embarassed by the way Phaneuf the poof, Regehr and sadly even Glencross present themselves on the ice.

And don't tell me it's cause they aren't going to risk hurting themselves against goons. Much better players than them are willing to fight in this league. The flames are spineless.

Avatar
#139 Oil Kings 'n' Pretty Things
October 10 2009, 01:17PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

@ Rosscreek:

~Yeah. For shame.~

Avatar
#140 BigE57
October 10 2009, 01:21PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props
RossCreekNation wrote:

And I don't think there was anything wrong with how Moreau handled it (with the exception of him not being able to stay upright). If it was a dirty cheapshot, then maybe talk of the goon going out and jumping him would've been more appropriate, but it was an accidental play. Should he recieve a penalty - sure. He knew the code. He knew their would be payback and when Moreau came, he obliged. Sure he likes to fight, but thats not a good trade-off from the Flames perspective. But Iginla "gave him the honour of seeking retribution". And I don't see anything wrong with that from Moreau's perspective.

As for Quinn's comments... everyone's been so busy yappin about this that his team hasn't had to answer the questions of losing the lead with seconds left on a goal that clearly was NOT a high stick.

I wouldn't say clearly NOT a high stick. Even the referee wasn't sure and in the end there wasn't enough video evidence to overturn the ruling on the ice that it was a goal. Had the referee blown the whistle without signalling the goal and went directly upstairs to review, things might be different.

Anyway, what's done is done much like the "Iginla" incident.

It's early in the season so I don't think there is reason to panic yet. Though watching both Edmonton teams lose in the final minute three times in one week is a little much to take.

Avatar
#141 Oil Kings 'n' Pretty Things
October 10 2009, 01:27PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

@Word

PS I'd still take Glencross in a second. Every Flames game I watch I'm forced to comment on how much I regret that the Oilers lost him.

Avatar
#142 Paq Twinn
October 10 2009, 01:31PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

@oilkings n pretty things I have to agree that the last loss is on Hemmer's shoulders. There's a time to be cute, and protecting a lead in the last minute is not the time to get cute. Gain center take a few strides(if possible) and get that f-ing puck DEEP! Don't try and skate through 6(extra attacker) opposing players. When is this guy going to learn?

Avatar
#143 Word
October 10 2009, 01:32PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

@Oil Kings 'n' Pretty Things

I know. It stings - I wish the Oil had been smart enough to throw some $$ his way during Operation Hossa, but Stauffer had it right when he said that Glencross is fast becoming the toughest guy in the league from behind a linesman.

Avatar
#144 Smiley
October 10 2009, 02:06PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props
Word wrote:

I know. It stings - I wish the Oil had been smart enough to throw some $$ his way during Operation Hossa, but Stauffer had it right when he said that Glencross is fast becoming the toughest guy in the league from behind a linesman.

Harsh... Then again, the oilers stuck it out for a long time with Mush (Marchment) back in the bad old days, and he didn't exactly have a rep for being the most chivalrous player out there...

Avatar
#145 sitting-at-my -desk
October 10 2009, 02:09PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

what are the lines for tonight?

Avatar
#146 Oil Kings 'n' Pretty Things
October 10 2009, 02:09PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

@sitting-at-my -desk

See post #134.

Avatar
#147 Word
October 10 2009, 02:18PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props
Smiley wrote:

Harsh... Then again, the oilers stuck it out for a long time with Mush (Marchment) back in the bad old days, and he didn't exactly have a rep for being the most chivalrous player out there...

That's true. Mush was a dirty player that didn't like to be accountable.

That guy would throw knees on a regular basis. He was nice to have on the team, but I like to see that type of player get punched in the mouth once in a while.

Avatar
#148 Jason Gregor
October 10 2009, 02:31PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props
Word wrote:

That's true. Mush was a dirty player that didn't like to be accountable.

That guy would throw knees on a regular basis. He was nice to have on the team, but I like to see that type of player get punched in the mouth once in a while.

Mush fought a lot of the heavyweights. He was very accountable. He played on the edge and when he crossed it he would fight. He never fought after every hit, and he didn't need to, but go look at his fight resume, he fought the Laraques and Domis.

Avatar
#149 Word
October 10 2009, 02:36PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

@Jason Gregor

I took a look and stand corrected.

Avatar
#150 Librarian Mike
October 10 2009, 03:04PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

@Jason Gregor

I think the reason why people think Marchment was a dodger is that he always seemed to be really pragmatic when talking about his style of play. Guys like C. Lemieux would cop the "I'm just doing what it takes to win" line, whereas Mush was like, "Well, he had his head down so whatever". I used to love that guy when he played here.

Comments are closed for this article.