Bertuzzi Lock Out....;-(
View Single Post
10-24-2012, 08:29 AM
Join Date: Feb 2010
Originally Posted by
No he didn't. For payback Moore should have gone through 3 or 4 fights that game and taken his licks. None of this would have happened. If he could have turned and faced Bertuzzi and squared off it would have ended the whole thing. Instead Moore tried to skate away and Bert lost it, lost his mind and jumped Moore in a blind rage.
So because Moore PLAYING HOCKEY (watch the damn tape) instead of participating in a stupid sideshow to gratify the less-evolved, it makes it okay for Bertuzzi to lose his **** and end his career?
Eva you're judging by the standards of today which are very different than the enforcement of hockey justice in the past. A few of the attitudes remain but a lot of the violent retribution of the 1970's has been discouraged. Bertuzzi grew up playing through the 80's and 90's and man those were some tough days. The values of that era were different.
But Bertuzzi wasn't playing in that era. It doesn't matter what era he grew up in and "how it was back in the day." It was 2004 and Bertuzzi assaulted a man. A good old Canadian thing to do, if it's done on a hockey rink.
Originally Posted by
They are in a large part different because of this very incident.
In any case, Moore did not need to drop the gloves again depending on certain variables and some of that is on the Canucks. Certainly the blowout played a part. But if the Canucks wanted him to fight May or Bertuzzi that should have been known early. He felt he answered the call by fighting Cooke. The blowout didn't help things, neither did his coach continuing to play him when it was clear he would be a target. But to a certain degree it should have been made clear to Moore that he needed to fight May or Bert to begin with. It has been a while and I am pretty sure he ducked May before the Cooke fight. I know he could have gone with Sean Pronger right before the actual Bert incident as well. Not a great matchup but better than May or Bert.
But 3 or 4 times is absurd and I don't really have a huge fault with him thinking that one was enough. It was clear as the game was getting out of control he might have to go again. What he should have done is picked another player or actual went to a linesman and said I have to go with him, jump in as quickly as possible.
None of that unfortunately happened. If he takes the enforcer first it is a one off deal in my opinion. Part of the reason Cooke actually went with Thornton of Boston.
Since it is clear this is where this thread is heading all of a sudden. Here is Steve Moore's teammate during that game Scott Parker in an interview about it.
Ah, the Parker interview. The one where he tries to make it sound like the entire situation was Moore's fault, and not that of angry enforcers (hmm, what's that Scott, you're looking for work?) and even tries to say Bertuzzi was "softening the blow" on Moore... LOL. Yeah, I punch guys in the back of the head, then try to make sure they don't hit their head too hard on the ground. That's EXACTLY my thought process.
View Public Profile
Find More Posts by pdd