HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Atlantic Division > Montreal Canadiens
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

Boston Bruins @ Vancouver Canucks game 7 winner takes all

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
06-14-2011, 11:22 AM
  #1
Habs 4 Life
No Excuses
 
Habs 4 Life's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Montreal
Country: Italy
Posts: 32,991
vCash: 500
Boston Bruins @ Vancouver Canucks game 7 winner takes all

Winner gets the

Habs 4 Life is offline  
Old
06-14-2011, 11:23 AM
  #2
WeThreeKings
Registered User
 
WeThreeKings's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Halifax
Country: Canada
Posts: 33,289
vCash: 500
Send a message via MSN to WeThreeKings
Sorry guys, I suggest not tuning in.

WeThreeKings is offline  
Old
06-14-2011, 11:24 AM
  #3
Habs 4 Life
No Excuses
 
Habs 4 Life's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Montreal
Country: Italy
Posts: 32,991
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by WeThreeKings View Post
Sorry guys, I suggest not tuning in.
Watching Luongo Choke is kind of fun to be honest

Habs 4 Life is offline  
Old
06-14-2011, 11:28 AM
  #4
Aspirine
Lateral Move at Best
 
Aspirine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,269
vCash: 50
If there was such a possibility, I'd want none of those pathetic franchises to win. It's a disgrace to hockey, really.

Aspirine is offline  
Old
06-14-2011, 11:30 AM
  #5
windycity
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Well duh
Posts: 3,124
vCash: 500
Unfortunately, the Bruins are going to win - less beat up, Thomas better than overrated and choking Luongo, and have played with more heart.

Really hope I'm wrong though . . .

windycity is offline  
Old
06-14-2011, 11:32 AM
  #6
usernam
Registered User
 
usernam's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Toronto, ON
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,265
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Habs 4 Life View Post
Watching Luongo Choke is kind of fun to be honest
It's crazy because after yesterday's game, Luongo could have a 46-save shutout tomorrow and will still be labelled as a choker.

usernam is offline  
Old
06-14-2011, 11:33 AM
  #7
habdynasty
Registered User
 
habdynasty's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,773
vCash: 500
Cmon canucks! Please please win !

habdynasty is offline  
Old
06-14-2011, 11:39 AM
  #8
Patccmoi
Registered User
 
Patccmoi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 1,057
vCash: 500
I want the Bruins to lose. But tbh after yesterday I don't really want any of these teams to win... Any chance it gets to 6th OT and they just decide to call it a draw and cancel the whole thing?

Sorry Canucks fan, I know you like the support from the Habs brass, but geez your team has been a total disgrace in Boston in all 3 games.

Patccmoi is offline  
Old
06-14-2011, 11:43 AM
  #9
Bill McNeal
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 12,310
vCash: 50
A lot of conspiracy theories being tossed around in the last thread... The league doesn't want the Bruins to win (or at least not to the point of favoring them outside of letting that idiot Colin Campbell keep his job all season), they're just inept when it comes to discipline. The Bruins have taken advantage of it, but no more than any team in the past has taken advantage of fortuitous circumstances to win championships.

If you want to talk about an area where I think there's evidence that the Bruins have quite a bit of influence... Anybody else find it funny that they're the main trailblazers in the movement to eliminate hitting from the game?

I don't mean eliminating hitting entirely, of course, but that's the verbage commonly used by those who get up in arms every time the league brings up the headshot debate.

You have Savard taken out by a then legal Matt Cooke hit that was very similar to one thrown by Richards on Booth earlier that year that nobody cared about until after the Savard incident. The Bruins raise a stink, as they should because they lost their best offensive player, and the league adopts a new headshot rule mid-season that would eventually morph into Rule 48 that off-season. Good for those who care about player safety, bad for those who enjoy killing time with 10 minutes of Scott Stevens highlights.

Numerous incidents occur throughout the following season, with varying results. Some are suspensions, some aren't, with no real rhyme nor reason. Flash forward to last week and Rome takes out Horton on a textbook hit that the league went out its way to say was still acceptable, only problem is Rome throws it a second late. An update on Horton's condition comes out the next day, an hour later Rome is suspended an unprecedented 4 games for an interference penalty. Now we hear talk about expanding rule 48 to include any hit that targets the head. Sounds like a rule straight out of European hockey... But that can't be, because those Euros are a bunch of diving pansies, right?

If you're an advocate of player safety you should think positively of the impact the Bruins have had on the game. I don't think they're doing it on purpose, mind you. I think it's a combination of a team looking out for their own players (like all do) and having an owner with a lot of pull. The difference between having a Jeremy Jacobs and a Geoff Molson as an owner is the difference between getting your own rule in the book and being told to re-design your arena.

Just ironic is what it is.

Bill McNeal is offline  
Old
06-14-2011, 11:49 AM
  #10
shiram
Registered User
 
shiram's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Habstown
Country: Canada
Posts: 84
vCash: 500
This Stanley Cups final has been very boring to me, and I'll be glad to have it over. I hate the Bruins and their antics, and could care less about the Canucks at this point.

The bad calls and horrible reffing really shines the league in a bad light too.

shiram is offline  
Old
06-14-2011, 11:52 AM
  #11
BenchBrawl
joueur de hockey
 
BenchBrawl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 9,226
vCash: 50
Go Bruins! O6 for the cup !

BenchBrawl is offline  
Old
06-14-2011, 11:55 AM
  #12
Patccmoi
Registered User
 
Patccmoi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 1,057
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frogurt View Post
A lot of conspiracy theories being tossed around in the last thread... The league doesn't want the Bruins to win (or at least not to the point of favoring them outside of letting that idiot Colin Campbell keep his job all season), they're just inept when it comes to discipline. The Bruins have taken advantage of it, but no more than any team in the past has taken advantage of fortuitous circumstances to win championships.

If you want to talk about an area where I think there's evidence that the Bruins have quite a bit of influence... Anybody else find it funny that they're the main trailblazers in the movement to eliminate hitting from the game?

I don't mean eliminating hitting entirely, of course, but that's the verbage commonly used by those who get up in arms every time the league brings up the headshot debate.

You have Savard taken out by a then legal Matt Cooke hit that was very similar to one thrown by Richards on Booth earlier that year that nobody cared about until after the Savard incident. The Bruins raise a stink, as they should because they lost their best offensive player, and the league adopts a new headshot rule mid-season that would eventually morph into Rule 48 that off-season. Good for those who care about player safety, bad for those who enjoy killing time with 10 minutes of Scott Stevens highlights.

Numerous incidents occur throughout the following season, with varying results. Some are suspensions, some aren't, with no real rhyme nor reason. Flash forward to last week and Rome takes out Horton on a textbook hit that the league went out its way to say was still acceptable, only problem is Rome throws it a second late. An update on Horton's condition comes out the next day, an hour later Rome is suspended an unprecedented 4 games for an interference penalty. Now we hear talk about expanding rule 48 to include any hit that targets the head. Sounds like a rule straight out of European hockey... But that can't be, because those Euros are a bunch of diving pansies, right?

If you're an advocate of player safety you should think positively of the impact the Bruins have had on the game. I don't think they're doing it on purpose, mind you. I think it's a combination of a team looking out for their own players (like all do) and having an owner with a lot of pull. The difference between having a Jeremy Jacobs and a Geoff Molson as an owner is the difference between getting your own rule in the book and being told to re-design your arena.

Just ironic is what it is.
So, are you suggesting that to insure player safety for the future we should just bite the bullet and headshot Bruins regularly so that they force the rule changes?

I think you make a very valid point with having Jacobs vs Molson as an owner. But I think it does have more influence than which rule gets in the book, it also has an influence on which rules get applied or not. Jacobs calls Murphy and screams at him after seeing one of his player taken out, there might be a much harsher sanction following than if Molson does it. Sure seems this way.

I mean, the NHL really does come off as a boys club with some friends at the top doing whatever they want together and laughing at the rest. Come on, Murphy ASKED BURKE'S ADVICE regarding Rome's suspension? A guy that had a conflict of interest with the team in question? And just seeing the previous emails from Campbell was proof enough of how things are handled there.

Note that the NHL is far from the only entity like that. That's how it works everywhere, Bruins just happen to be part of the group of friends at the top.

Patccmoi is offline  
Old
06-14-2011, 12:05 PM
  #13
WeThreeKings
Registered User
 
WeThreeKings's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Halifax
Country: Canada
Posts: 33,289
vCash: 500
Send a message via MSN to WeThreeKings
This will be like when I turned the TV off the Hurricanes and Penguins cup victories.

WeThreeKings is offline  
Old
06-14-2011, 12:27 PM
  #14
Bullsmith
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 4,122
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frogurt View Post
A lot of conspiracy theories being tossed around in the last thread... The league doesn't want the Bruins to win (or at least not to the point of favoring them outside of letting that idiot Colin Campbell keep his job all season), they're just inept when it comes to discipline. The Bruins have taken advantage of it, but no more than any team in the past has taken advantage of fortuitous circumstances to win championships.

If you want to talk about an area where I think there's evidence that the Bruins have quite a bit of influence... Anybody else find it funny that they're the main trailblazers in the movement to eliminate hitting from the game?

I don't mean eliminating hitting entirely, of course, but that's the verbage commonly used by those who get up in arms every time the league brings up the headshot debate.

You have Savard taken out by a then legal Matt Cooke hit that was very similar to one thrown by Richards on Booth earlier that year that nobody cared about until after the Savard incident. The Bruins raise a stink, as they should because they lost their best offensive player, and the league adopts a new headshot rule mid-season that would eventually morph into Rule 48 that off-season. Good for those who care about player safety, bad for those who enjoy killing time with 10 minutes of Scott Stevens highlights.

Numerous incidents occur throughout the following season, with varying results. Some are suspensions, some aren't, with no real rhyme nor reason. Flash forward to last week and Rome takes out Horton on a textbook hit that the league went out its way to say was still acceptable, only problem is Rome throws it a second late. An update on Horton's condition comes out the next day, an hour later Rome is suspended an unprecedented 4 games for an interference penalty. Now we hear talk about expanding rule 48 to include any hit that targets the head. Sounds like a rule straight out of European hockey... But that can't be, because those Euros are a bunch of diving pansies, right?

If you're an advocate of player safety you should think positively of the impact the Bruins have had on the game. I don't think they're doing it on purpose, mind you. I think it's a combination of a team looking out for their own players (like all do) and having an owner with a lot of pull. The difference between having a Jeremy Jacobs and a Geoff Molson as an owner is the difference between getting your own rule in the book and being told to re-design your arena.

Just ironic is what it is.
I see it a bit differently. I think Julien clearly started pushing the envelope and the more he got away with, the more the Bruins exploited the NHL's inability to mete out discipline in any kind of logical format. I think back to Julien putting out goons in the final minutes of games that were already decided and starting fights. The Spacek Pyatt beatings were textbook examples. There's a blatantly clear rule that the coach gets fined for that, but Julien didn't. Everything that's happened since, including Max Pax, stems from the fact that the NHL told Julien loud and clear that the "New NHL" rules were no longer in effect for his team. Sure you'll get called for hooking, but keeping on beating players after they're down and out on the ice are suddenly not infractions any more. Even if you "lose control" of your equipment and slice their faces to ribbons, hey, it's the Bruins. The double standards are so blatant, be it squirting water or making obscene gestures at fans, sending out "messages" in games you've already lost or causing concussions via late hits (dirty or not.) Other teams got penalized for these things, the Bruins didn't. It's not a coincidence, it's a pattern.

Bullsmith is offline  
Old
06-14-2011, 12:31 PM
  #15
Samzilla
Registered User
 
Samzilla's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 9,284
vCash: 934
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bullsmith View Post
I see it a bit differently. I think Julien clearly started pushing the envelope and the more he got away with, the more the Bruins exploited the NHL's inability to mete out discipline in any kind of logical format. I think back to Julien putting out goons in the final minutes of games that were already decided and starting fights. The Spacek Pyatt beatings were textbook examples. There's a blatantly clear rule that the coach gets fined for that, but Julien didn't. Everything that's happened since, including Max Pax, stems from the fact that the NHL told Julien loud and clear that the "New NHL" rules were no longer in effect for his team. Sure you'll get called for hooking, but keeping on beating players after they're down and out on the ice are suddenly not infractions any more. Even if you "lose control" of your equipment and slice their faces to ribbons, hey, it's the Bruins. The double standards are so blatant, be it squirting water or making obscene gestures at fans, sending out "messages" in games you've already lost or causing concussions via late hits (dirty or not.) Other teams got penalized for these things, the Bruins didn't. It's not a coincidence, it's a pattern.
What you have to understand is--the Bruins don't play dirty. They're just on the right end of lots of freak accidents/equipment malfunctions. They're the victims here.

Samzilla is offline  
Old
06-14-2011, 12:34 PM
  #16
Bullsmith
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 4,122
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Samzilla View Post
What you have to understand is--the Bruins don't play dirty. They're just on the right end of lots of freak accidents/equipment malfunctions. They're the victims here.
I know. The way the Sedin's disgustingly took punches and cross cheks last game without retaliating was disgusting. Didn't matter if it was behind the play or after the whistle, the Sedins just wouldn't play the game properly. Hank even fell down when Chara shoved him! Twice! And the puck was nowhere near him. ****ing Swedish cheater.

Thankfully, the fact that the Sedins got 12 minutes for taking clean, honest cheapshots while Chara and Marchand only got 4 minutes for dishing it out is evidence that at least the refs are doing something to even the score and protect Boston from such abuse. Really to make things fair they should move game 7 to Boston.

Bullsmith is offline  
Old
06-14-2011, 12:38 PM
  #17
Bill McNeal
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 12,310
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Patccmoi View Post
So, are you suggesting that to insure player safety for the future we should just bite the bullet and headshot Bruins regularly so that they force the rule changes?

I think you make a very valid point with having Jacobs vs Molson as an owner. But I think it does have more influence than which rule gets in the book, it also has an influence on which rules get applied or not. Jacobs calls Murphy and screams at him after seeing one of his player taken out, there might be a much harsher sanction following than if Molson does it. Sure seems this way.

I mean, the NHL really does come off as a boys club with some friends at the top doing whatever they want together and laughing at the rest. Come on, Murphy ASKED BURKE'S ADVICE regarding Rome's suspension? A guy that had a conflict of interest with the team in question? And just seeing the previous emails from Campbell was proof enough of how things are handled there.

Note that the NHL is far from the only entity like that. That's how it works everywhere, Bruins just happen to be part of the group of friends at the top.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bullsmith View Post
I see it a bit differently. I think Julien clearly started pushing the envelope and the more he got away with, the more the Bruins exploited the NHL's inability to mete out discipline in any kind of logical format. I think back to Julien putting out goons in the final minutes of games that were already decided and starting fights. The Spacek Pyatt beatings were textbook examples. There's a blatantly clear rule that the coach gets fined for that, but Julien didn't. Everything that's happened since, including Max Pax, stems from the fact that the NHL told Julien loud and clear that the "New NHL" rules were no longer in effect for his team. Sure you'll get called for hooking, but keeping on beating players after they're down and out on the ice are suddenly not infractions any more. Even if you "lose control" of your equipment and slice their faces to ribbons, hey, it's the Bruins. The double standards are so blatant, be it squirting water or making obscene gestures at fans, sending out "messages" in games you've already lost or causing concussions via late hits (dirty or not.) Other teams got penalized for these things, the Bruins didn't. It's not a coincidence, it's a pattern.
I agree that Jacobs has influence, but I also think a team like Montreal or New York has more sway than the Nashvilles and Carolinas of the world (unless you're a team facing bankruptcy, then the league bends over backwards for you).

I don't think there's malicious intent behind this, just seems some teams are better at getting in the league's ear than others. It's just a ****ed up hierarchy in the NHL that's only compounded further by general incompetence by those in charge.

Bill McNeal is offline  
Old
06-14-2011, 12:41 PM
  #18
WhiskeySeven
Keeps hot stuff hot
 
WhiskeySeven's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 13,885
vCash: 500
I hate loluongo after last night. He didn't deserve the gold medal and doesn't deserve the cup. What a joke.

The Sedins have been horrible too. What a bunch of gutless cowards.

WhiskeySeven is offline  
Old
06-14-2011, 12:45 PM
  #19
neofury*
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Montreal, PQ
Country: Canada
Posts: 20,277
vCash: 500
I hate both teams so much but I bandwagoned with Vancouver for the greater good against my better judgment. I knew Luongo would choke but after 2-0 just like in the Montreal series, my faith was somewhat renewed.

Now Luongo has been the biggest choker in NHL history. Winning the cup will make him less of a choker of course but even then if the Canucks win it will have been the ugliest cup victory of any team that I've seen in years. What would the goal differential be for Van -15 + win the cup in the same series?

I hate Boston but they deserve to win. They've played the way playoff hockey is meant to be played. They've done some less than classy things and I hate them for it but they're playing playoff hockey and Vancouver isn't. It's like after the first game where they came out forechecking hard and won the game they put on the brakes.

They need to play the way they did at the first ten minutes of game #1 for the entire game #7. They have to be hungry and play like the #1 team not like a bunch of pansy's who are trying to win a cup by diving. If Vancouver loses it will cement Luongo in my mind and imo in history as one of the most overrated choking goaltenders of all time. (Barring him winning back to back cups )

Vancouver isn't playing great in front of him mind you but it's hard to get into the game when your goalie is allowing goals left and right and not even giving you a chance to win. He has to steal some goals and what I see is an average goalie out there who allows typical goals. I don't see a Price, I don't see a Rinner, I don't see a Thomas, I don't even see a Halak, this guy is incapable of making big saves in important games. Like another poster mentioned if the roles were reversed between Miller and Luongo in the olympics the USA would be gold medalists right now in a land slide victory.

This guy is such a choker, I knew he would choke but he kept proving me wrong with each passing series. I finally started to believe in this team and think they had a chance. Now the Luongo we all know all too well is back and playing the way we know he can.

neofury* is offline  
Old
06-14-2011, 12:46 PM
  #20
Bullsmith
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 4,122
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frogurt View Post
I agree that Jacobs has influence, but I also think a team like Montreal or New York has more sway than the Nashvilles and Carolinas of the world (unless you're a team facing bankruptcy, then the league bends over backwards for you).

I don't think there's malicious intent behind this, just seems some teams are better at getting in the league's ear than others. It's just a ****ed up hierarchy in the NHL that's only compounded further by general incompetence by those in charge.
Whether it's malice or incompetence, the end result is the same. Anyway, while there may not be malice behind the way the league's mangled discipline, there is clearly malice on the ice (and from the B's bench, I assert) that gets protected and rewarded.

The NHL has gotten itself to a point where ending Syd Crosby's career didn't draw a penalty call, but receiving a cross check from Chara or a punch from Marchand most certainly does. Driving a guy's head into a stanchion (after threatening him!) almost two seconds after he's released the puck is a "strong hockey play" that the league is "extraordinarily comfortable" with not reacting to. Making a clean open ice hit less than a second late, however, is the worst infraction in NHL finals history. The forearm to the head is ignored, the shoulder to chest is stigmatized. Nomatter how you slice it that's ****ed up. The intention may not be malicious, but the result sure as hell is.

I wish I were just venting my opinion, but the box score makes these all facts.

Bullsmith is offline  
Old
06-14-2011, 01:07 PM
  #21
Samzilla
Registered User
 
Samzilla's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 9,284
vCash: 934
The question is, how many more times do the Bruins have to "freak accident" somebody until people start to think...maybe it's not such a freak accident. I'm going to say 2.

Here's hoping for a well played game 7 where the Nucks put up their best effort yet.

Samzilla is offline  
Old
06-14-2011, 01:30 PM
  #22
neofury*
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Montreal, PQ
Country: Canada
Posts: 20,277
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bullsmith View Post
Whether it's malice or incompetence, the end result is the same. Anyway, while there may not be malice behind the way the league's mangled discipline, there is clearly malice on the ice (and from the B's bench, I assert) that gets protected and rewarded.

The NHL has gotten itself to a point where ending Syd Crosby's career didn't draw a penalty call, but receiving a cross check from Chara or a punch from Marchand most certainly does. Driving a guy's head into a stanchion (after threatening him!) almost two seconds after he's released the puck is a "strong hockey play" that the league is "extraordinarily comfortable" with not reacting to. Making a clean open ice hit less than a second late, however, is the worst infraction in NHL finals history. The forearm to the head is ignored, the shoulder to chest is stigmatized. Nomatter how you slice it that's ****ed up. The intention may not be malicious, but the result sure as hell is.

I wish I were just venting my opinion, but the box score makes these all facts.
Trust me I know how you feel. When Raymond went down the other day it wasn't so much that I thought it was intent to injure but I thought about coming on HF to post "A Canuck just got injured guys, I'm in total shock"

I don't know what to believe anymore but just from what you say in your post I'm pretty unhappy with the way the league handled it. I'm not saying Chara should have been suspended for 3 years here, but come on!

neofury* is offline  
Old
06-14-2011, 01:54 PM
  #23
FlyingRat
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 431
vCash: 500
I wish we could lend the Canucks Carey for game 7.

FlyingRat is offline  
Old
06-14-2011, 01:57 PM
  #24
GoodKiwi
Registered User
 
GoodKiwi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Montreal
Country: Georgia
Posts: 9,325
vCash: 500
It's like choosing my own death by impaling or by cyanide. I have to go with the latter.

GoodKiwi is offline  
Old
06-14-2011, 02:14 PM
  #25
Bob Cole
Registered User
 
Bob Cole's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,353
vCash: 500
ive come to terms with the bruins winning it all. The only thing that will make it bearable is going to see the riots in Vancouver after they lose.

what ever happens the sun will come up the following day

Bob Cole is offline  
Closed Thread

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:05 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2014 All Rights Reserved.