Lockout Discussion Thread 3.0
View Single Post
11-26-2012, 11:23 AM
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Mumbai via MTL
Originally Posted by
If you actually read the interview in it's entirety it's quite interesting. Why does Hamrlik not have a right to an opinion? He said himself he may be selfish. He actually said he was at a meeting in the summer where the "gameplan" was layed out. My perception is that what was sold to the players isn't coming to fruition and that's what Hamr sees. And even here today a solution doesn't seem nearby.
Hamrlik isn't a hero. He's just a player who was pretty frank and honest about his feelings and had the gumption to speak about it. It also sounds like he voiced his ideas to Cole and Gorges and the results didn't sound too productive for him so he took another route, stepped on some precious toes and got somebody's attention.
Meanwhile another faction of players Tweet, make their own false accusations, bash on a personal level, make goofy hats and act with a basic immaturity that I'm somewhat surprised at. And now others are telling Hamr he has no right to speak because they think he's not informed. To say he is not informed sounds like a big assumption to me.
I tend to agree with this. I don't think he was trying to be a hero, although may be perceived as one by those who
a) side with the owners/think the players are greedy millionaires
b) just wish this would be over with
Like swimmer said, it's as though the players had this gameplan laid out in which they were a little too cocky (at Fehr's hand) by not putting proposals in early (if you recall). Then things started going very badly. Now it's about Bettman vs. Fehr, which was always going to be the one thing you wanted to avoid (an ego showdown). The players aren't in a great place now and I don't blame them for trying to keep fighting, but to a vet who's been through quite a few lockouts (not like he didn't put in his time), a lot of this IS petty BS.
Brouwer has his own perspective and you could interpret it as staying the course OR continuing to bang your head against a wall while depriving fans of hockey. I do understand that it's not about a small amount for many players as well as it's also about the future of the NHL and players' rights, but I don't disagree with Hamrlik. The fact he's a PA member, maybe that's what makes it incendiary.
So if and when the season does resume, even next year, do Hammer and Brouwer become bunk buddies? I would not be pleased if there was this kind of dissent in our locker room (I hardly think Cole's comments were taken badly by our players -- if anything he was fighting FOR the players, perhaps with a weak hand).
View Public Profile
Find More Posts by habtastic