Why bench Laraque and Stewart?
View Single Post
04-10-2009, 11:06 AM
Join Date: Jul 2006
Originally Posted by
Gainey had a gameplan - We need the point(s) more then anything. Let them come at us yet never drop the gloves. The refs will have to flow them with penalties and we can only score on penalties anyways. So - provoke penalties even if it means getting hurt. Remember the first penalty in the game that Pleks obtained behind Thomas' net.
The problem was that the refs messed with his game plan. Chara charging Komisarek like he did, after a clean hit, should have got a game(s) suspension+, not a roughing penalty on both sides. Also - Lucic as third man. That's why Gainey was really angry at the officials after the game and I expect him to protest officially.
Still, somehow the gameplan worked in the end - we got the point thanks to our powerplay and to indiscipline penalties in the end.
Playing Laraque and Stewart would have kept the Bruins out of the penalty box and we would have scored a lot less.
The "game plan" could have seen some serious injuries to Komisarek and other of our players... BRILLIANT Gainey!
What a ****ing ridiculous decision not to dress Laraque last night! Why the hell did Gainey sign him? Wouldn't he be better than ****ing O'Byrne sitting at the end of the bench?
I love Gainey, I love Carbonneau, but they seem to suffer from memory loss. They don't believe in that kind of players but yet, they've both benefited of Pierre Bouchard, Chris Nilan and John Kordic, just to name a few.
For Christ sake, you're going to Boston, why put Komisarek, Latendresse, Lapierre and your other players in that position? I bet you anything that the players were wondering what the **** Gainey was thinking!
Thornton, Lucy and company acted like they owned the place tonight. I can guarantee you that they wouldn't have acted that way with BGL in the line-up!
View Public Profile
Visit Habsterix*'s homepage!
Find More Posts by Habsterix*