Tungsten Posted February 13, 2009 Share Posted February 13, 2009 Kipper has definitely showed signs of how he played during the cup run lately. You could tell he wanted the shut out ,in the third period every time he went down he was back up just as fast. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darrinhurst Posted February 13, 2009 Share Posted February 13, 2009 You could tell he wanted the shut out ,in the third period every time he went down he was back up just as fast. I was able to catch most of the last period, and I don't think I've ever seen him look as calm and collected with every stop as I did then. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest RedWiggler Posted February 15, 2009 Share Posted February 15, 2009 Phew, needed all of them tonight! Wish they would have shown that fight in the stands after the Dion scuffle in the 3rd lol. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
reevesr1 Posted February 18, 2009 Share Posted February 18, 2009 Damn. Pretty good goaltender you guys got there. Edit: other guy didn't suck much either. Fun game. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rehsifylf Posted February 18, 2009 Share Posted February 18, 2009 Poor power play needs to get going. 12 SH goals against and a piss poor rate of scoring will not cut it. Vancouver is short on talent for sure, but they have a good special teams and that is all you need in this league to win. 1 PP, 1 SH, and one with the goalie pulled. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest RedWiggler Posted February 18, 2009 Share Posted February 18, 2009 It was a great game to watch. But was painfull to watch the Flames at the end of the game in there own end, just lay back and watch Van score the 3rd to tie it up. I could just feel that goal coming, they were just standig around watching them....big let down there. That was a painfull loss to a crappy team but was one of the more exciting games I have seen this year. Both goalies put on a clinic!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Highlander Posted February 18, 2009 Share Posted February 18, 2009 That was a painfull loss to a crappy team Crappy team???? Crappy team????? Thems fightin' words!!! When Luongo was pulled I was thinking that the Canucks deserved at least a point, even though a couple of Calgary's goals were not great (Mitchell and Burrows givaways). The one save of Kiprusoff off Wellwood was simply amazing. Both teams had better than 40 shots. Good to see Iginla get one. Classiest guy in hockey IMHO. It's just too bad the Canucks are turning things around and WILL beat Calgary for tops in the Northwest Division. :) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest RedWiggler Posted February 18, 2009 Share Posted February 18, 2009 Well If we keep going they way we are and Van continues to improve, it could be close at the end of the season (DAM)!!! The Flames definitely need to step there game up. Kipper is finally playing like a champion and the team is pooping there pants infront of him. Mind you last night I did not even care that they lost, that was such an entertaining game to watch. I was just pissed that they fell asleep at the end to let VAN back in. WHAT A GAME!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gomphus Posted February 18, 2009 Share Posted February 18, 2009 What a Game is right, i get to one canucks flames game a year, and glad i picked that one, great goaltending, that kipper save on Wellwood has to be one of the best of the year, and best of all canucks win it in a shootout...poor bertuzzi Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest RedWiggler Posted February 18, 2009 Share Posted February 18, 2009 I gave my tix for that game away. So im sitting at home watching it thinking "Dam I shouldve kept those ones" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rehsifylf Posted February 18, 2009 Share Posted February 18, 2009 What a Game is right, i get to one canucks flames game a year, and glad i picked that one, great goaltending, that kipper save on Wellwood has to be one of the best of the year, and best of all canucks win it in a shootout...poor bertuzzi Much as I hate Van - it was really nice to see Bert miss. His true colors showed right after missing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigbowtrout Posted February 18, 2009 Share Posted February 18, 2009 Much as I hate Van - it was really nice to see Bert miss. His true colors showed right after missing. It was a gutsy move that almost paid off against his old team.One inch to the left and he might have been a hero. Burt is gold in the shoot outs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hawgstoppah Posted February 19, 2009 Share Posted February 19, 2009 I for one was glad to see that kind of emotion from him. since his suspension he's been scared to play the damn game. tired of everyone treating him like a criminal for an act that happens in EVERY SINGLE hockey game.. that in his case had the worst possible outcome. Once again, the world looks at the outcome and not the act. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
reevesr1 Posted February 19, 2009 Share Posted February 19, 2009 Someone drives someone's head into the ice every damn game? Life expectancy must be short for hockey players. I HATE it when the team I pull for gets a bad guy only for the sake of winning. Shows a decided lack of character on the part of management. Thankfully, it almost never works. Put bad character on your team and chemistry typically goes to *hit. See the Dallas Cowboys as a prime example. Character counts in life, why shouldn't it count on a sports team? I still root for the Flames. I will not however root for #7. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hawgstoppah Posted February 19, 2009 Share Posted February 19, 2009 Rickr, Yes, damn near every game someone drives someone into the board, punches them in the face, gives them a facewash, steps on them with their skates, etc etc etc. The next time someone facewashes someone, what if they fall backwards ackwardly into the goal post and break there neck? is the guy facewashing the other guy gonna be a villain for the rest of his life? give it a rest. GO BERT GO! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hawgstoppah Posted February 19, 2009 Share Posted February 19, 2009 Why isnt heatley a frikkin villain? it's ok to get someone killed becuase your driving like an ass, but it's not ok to get in a scrum in a hockey game? I dont get it. out... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigbowtrout Posted February 19, 2009 Share Posted February 19, 2009 MacT killed someone drinking and driving but he is never boooed in every arena Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wanny Posted February 19, 2009 Share Posted February 19, 2009 Why isnt heatley a frikkin villain? it's ok to get someone killed becuase your driving like an ass, but it's not ok to get in a scrum in a hockey game? I dont get it. out... No kidding....... He is treated as a victim Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
reevesr1 Posted February 19, 2009 Share Posted February 19, 2009 First off, don't downplay the "scrum." There was nothing scrum like about what Bert did. To say otherwise is revisionist history. As to the booing of Bert-Calgary was the worst for the booing before they got him. A couple of goals, and all is forgiven 'eh? Should I post the definition of hypocrite here? How about the definition of rationalization? Look, I'm not exactly sure what Heatley and McT have to do with this. What each of them did was horrific, and I think dealt with by the justice system. Personally, I think they got off lightly (I think our drunk driving penalties are a joke. Could claim the same about reckless endangerment or vehicular manslaughter). But in both cases, it is difficult to come up with intent to harm on their part. In Bert's case it is difficult not to. In no way am I saying that Bert (or McT or Heatley) should not be allowed to play, or coach. They were all dealt with, whether you believe the punishments fit the crime or not, and as such deserve the opportunity to continue their career. Doesn't mean I would necessarily want them on my team. As to Bert, I certainly wouldn't have him on my team. Period. I may be in the minority on this and I'm ok with that. Didn't say anyone had to agree with me, just stating my view. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
orvisonly Posted February 19, 2009 Share Posted February 19, 2009 . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bhurt Posted February 19, 2009 Share Posted February 19, 2009 First off, don't downplay the "scrum." There was nothing scrum like about what Bert did. To say otherwise is revisionist history. As to the booing of Bert-Calgary was the worst for the booing before they got him. A couple of goals, and all is forgiven 'eh? Should I post the definition of hypocrite here? How about the definition of rationalization? Look, I'm not exactly sure what Heatley and McT have to do with this. What each of them did was horrific, and I think dealt with by the justice system. Personally, I think they got off lightly (I think our drunk driving penalties are a joke. Could claim the same about reckless endangerment or vehicular manslaughter). But in both cases, it is difficult to come up with intent to harm on their part. In Bert's case it is difficult not to. In no way am I saying that Bert (or McT or Heatley) should not be allowed to play, or coach. They were all dealt with, whether you believe the punishments fit the crime or not, and as such deserve the opportunity to continue their career. Doesn't mean I would necessarily want them on my team. As to Bert, I certainly wouldn't have him on my team. Period. I may be in the minority on this and I'm ok with that. Didn't say anyone had to agree with me, just stating my view. Hey rick, I think Bert has like 41 pts in 50 some odd games, I think that says alot there also. Plus, who doesn't boo for a star player on another team? Now I do not agree with what Bert did to Steve Moore but when you allow fighting in a sport then sometimes things get taken emotionally too far sometimes, I think there are players that act like children on and off the ice (Sean Avery) alot of times and NOT ALWAYS is there stuff done about, I just think everyone remebers what Bert did because of the what happened. And hey the fall to the ice broke Moore's neck not the punch from behind, don't forget that, anyone can break their neck on the ice if they fall wrong, now does that mean Bert is innoncent, hell no. Quick edit, you say drunk driving is not intent to harm, well I say that we as humans are educated to the point that we know if we drive impaired that someone could get hurt, just like bert could hurt someone with a punch! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
reevesr1 Posted February 19, 2009 Share Posted February 19, 2009 I think Bert has like 41 pts in 50 some odd games, I think that says alot there also. It shouldn't. Plus, who doesn't boo for a star player on another team? That's not why they booed him. Now I do not agree with what Bert did to Steve Moore but when you allow fighting in a sport then sometimes things get taken emotionally too far sometimes. OK, but still doesn't make me want him on my team. People fight all the time in hockey. Very few attack from behind and ride him down. Quick edit, you say drunk driving is not intent to harm, well I say that we as humans are educated to the point that we know if we drive impaired that someone could get hurt, just like bert could hurt someone with a punch! Agree to a point. I could argue intent to harm with drunk driving (and as I said, the punishment is far too lenient), but not the same as someone's rage taking them over the edge. But drunk driving and McT have nothing to do with this. I think it is total rationalization to look for other bad guys, or guys who did bad things, who are still in the game to make everyone feel ok with having Bert on your team. Anyway, this is probably pointless. If people are ok with it, nothing I'm going to say will change their mind. Conversely, I doubt anyone is going to change my mind either. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest RedWiggler Posted February 19, 2009 Share Posted February 19, 2009 Bert is a great player one of the Elite players in the league. Anyone that knows hockey or has played at a high level knows that was an accident and that he did not mean to break his neck. That said, I think the penalty he paid was a joke, sitting out for the lockout was a joke. He should have had to sit out a complete season when they were actually playing. I have always loved Bert and always will, I thought Steve Moore was a bitch before the incident and I still do. Bert is more comfortable this year in Calgary than he has been since then and its good to see. Guys get there careers cut short by injury all the time, this is no differant. Look at Scott Stevens, Hall Of Famer big tough great defencmen.....what a joke, he made a living out of hurting guys on purpose and I hate him because he could end your career in a heartbeat and it would be your fault for having your head down, he gets praised for that, what a joke. I dont know about you guys but how many times did we someone laying on the ice in the fetal position not knowing whether or not the guy would even get up again because of Scott Stevens. They were all head shots to, if they werent guys would not be laying unconcious in the middle of the ice. Scott Stevens = GOON and career ender, whats not Hall Of Fame about that, its a joke!!!Bert is not known as a dirty player or someone that would hurt you, Scott Stevens was, why should he get praised for hurting guys his whole career. I love Bert on the Flames and would love to see Darrell sign for a few more years, guy is amazing with the puck and he starting to play a little meaner these days as well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest RedWiggler Posted February 19, 2009 Share Posted February 19, 2009 Every body knows that drinking and driving is against the law and that people die on a daily basis because of it. So for someone to say there was know harm intended........are you kidding me. Drinking and driving is one of the worst things you can do because you put so many innocent people at risk. I think laws towards it are a total joke, there should zero tolerance shown to people who choose to do it, we know its wrong before we do it so punishment should be heavy and swift, personally I think one should have there driving priviledges revocted for life. There should be no second chances for people that drink and drive. My wife and I lost a good friend 3 years ago to a drunk driver, 5:00 in the afternoon, they saw him coming and could not even get out of his way. Our friend his wife and 1 year old were all in the car and they were all injured besides Pat (the father) who was killed on impact. The sick thing about this case is that this guy had just been released from Prison for hurting someone in a previous drunken episode. This was his 15th impaired and had just recievd his lisence back from a judge about week before he killed our friend. Whats right about that!!!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rehsifylf Posted February 19, 2009 Share Posted February 19, 2009 Agree with rickr points. I have to say, though, that my negative opinion of Bert is not based on what happened with Moore on the ice. It's hockey, and lots of guys have done much worse that what he did (Clarke, Richard, Messier, and the list goes on and on). I don't like the guy becuase I think he is a prick, who has none of the character traits that I admire in hockey players - other than some serious talent/skill. That is an opinion I've formed based on things he has said as much as the things he has done. My opinion is based on what he has said and done throughout his career, but especially the way he has dealt with the Moore aftermath by consistently trying to shift the blame (first to Moore himself - it was payback!, then to Crawford...), and protraying himself as a really nice guy who is the real victim in all this. People make mistakes and I tend to judge someone based on what they do after they make a mistake, more so than the mistake they made. I think many people do, and that is probably why Dany Heatly and Craig McT are less villified than Bert. I think they a) showed more genuine remorse, b.) didn't try to rationalize their actions, and c) showed a better pattern of strong character both before and after the specific incidents. Basically - when bad things happen to good people - they tend to get a break, but when bad things happen to jerks/pricks - not too many will cut them any slack. It happens in all sports - when a guy is a jerk, the fans will sense it, and if/when the guys screws up (and we all do) it stick to him/her like glue. In baseball it is Bonds and his Steroids, in hockey it is Bert and the Moore thing (...and Avery and his actions/comments) Hey - This would be a good time for a poll! Think I'll start one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.