RealGM

CoolKids wrote:hockey sucks

wwtsm wrote:He said the punishments from the Isles-Penguins game were too soft. That was the best thing to happen to hockey in the last 3 years. This is the only time anyone has talked about the sport since I can remember and fighting makes the game more exctiting.

But some came out firing at Lemieux. One unnamed NHL governor criticized Lemieux for failing to show up at league meetings, according to Sportsnet.ca.

Others, in the blogosphere, pointed out Lemieux’s apparent hypocrisy in wanting to clean up the game while employing Matt Cooke, who has been a heat-seeking (and concussion-causing) missile during his career. His hit last year on Boston’s Marc Savard, from which Savard is still suffering effects, was the impetus behind the league’s new ban on blind-side checks to the head.

When Mario Lemieux speaks, we listen. When he blasts the NHL and insinuates he might want to leave it – even if out of anger, even if only for effect – our jaws drop.

But when he rips the actions of others and ignores the crimes of his own team, we shake our heads, too. He comes off as a hypocrite, and his message – even if legitimate – might get lost.

The owner of the Pittsburgh Penguins released a statement Sunday on his team’s Web site, calling the now infamous brawl-filled 9-3 loss to the New York Islanders a “travesty” and a “sideshow,” saying the league failed to send a strong enough message with the discipline it imposed. The last line was the kicker.


“If the events relating to Friday night reflect the state of the league,” Lemieux said, “I need to re-think whether I want to be a part of it.”

The statement was time-stamped at 2:10 p.m. It wasn’t minutes old before a flurry of tweets focused not on what Lemieux said, but what he didn’t.

I was one of the many who immediately thought of Matt Cooke(notes), the Penguin who concussed the Boston Bruins’ Marc Savard(notes) with a blindside hit last season, the Penguin who stuck out his leg on the Washington Capitals’ Alex Ovechkin(notes) last Sunday, the Penguin whose hit from behind on the Columbus Blue Jackets’ Fedor Tyutin(notes) on Tuesday night resulted in a four-game suspension.

If Lemieux really wanted to make a statement, he could have said or done something about Cooke. Especially with Penguins star Sidney Crosby(notes) out with a concussion, he could have gone off on league issues – from the head shots to the head injuries to the line brawls to the goalie fights overshadowing the tight playoff races. He could have included Cooke in the discussion without even mentioning his name by simply saying even his own team hasn’t been blameless. But he didn’t.

GONYK wrote:

wwtsm wrote:He said the punishments from the Isles-Penguins game were too soft. That was the best thing to happen to hockey in the last 3 years. This is the only time anyone has talked about the sport since I can remember and fighting makes the game more exctiting.

I don't even follow hockey, but your point is completely stupid.

That's like saying David Stern should have encouraged the brawl in Detroit.

wwtsm wrote:He said the punishments from the Isles-Penguins game were too soft. That was the best thing to happen to hockey in the last 3 years. This is the only time anyone has talked about the sport since I can remember and fighting makes the game more exctiting.

wwtsm wrote:

GONYK wrote:

wwtsm wrote:He said the punishments from the Isles-Penguins game were too soft. That was the best thing to happen to hockey in the last 3 years. This is the only time anyone has talked about the sport since I can remember and fighting makes the game more exctiting.

I don't even follow hockey, but your point is completely stupid.

That's like saying David Stern should have encouraged the brawl in Detroit.

1. Fighting is allowed in hockey and not in basketball. What's the difference between one fight or ten fights a game besides ratings?

2. They didn't fight anyone in the stands, this is completely different, idiot.

vinnie_vegas69 wrote:

wwtsm wrote:He said the punishments from the Isles-Penguins game were too soft. That was the best thing to happen to hockey in the last 3 years. This is the only time anyone has talked about the sport since I can remember and fighting makes the game more exctiting.

Uh no... Fighting makes the game a joke.

If I wanted to see two idiots who don't know how to fight and don't have any chance of hurting each other throw wild haymakers at each other, I'll go down to a local high school. I have MMA and boxing to watch if I want to see fighting.

The fighting is one of the major reasons I don't watch hockey - There's an exciting game going on, and then two guys fumble around like they're trying to molest each other, and I get bored.

GONYK wrote:

wwtsm wrote:
1. Fighting is allowed in hockey and not in basketball. What's the difference between one fight or ten fights a game besides ratings?

2. They didn't fight anyone in the stands, this is completely different, idiot.

It's not exactly allowed, since they are penalized for it.

On top of that, no business wants negative publicity, which is what you are advocating. Hockey can't profit off of buzz they get from a incident they deemed "regrettable". They are in the business of selling hockey. They are not the UFC.

wwtsm wrote:

vinnie_vegas69 wrote:

wwtsm wrote:He said the punishments from the Isles-Penguins game were too soft. That was the best thing to happen to hockey in the last 3 years. This is the only time anyone has talked about the sport since I can remember and fighting makes the game more exctiting.

Uh no... Fighting makes the game a joke.

If I wanted to see two idiots who don't know how to fight and don't have any chance of hurting each other throw wild haymakers at each other, I'll go down to a local high school. I have MMA and boxing to watch if I want to see fighting.

The fighting is one of the major reasons I don't watch hockey - There's an exciting game going on, and then two guys fumble around like they're trying to molest each other, and I get bored.

Fair enough, but I think you're in the minority.

wwtsm wrote:He said the punishments from the Isles-Penguins game were too soft. That was the best thing to happen to hockey in the last 3 years. This is the only time anyone has talked about the sport since I can remember and fighting makes the game more exctiting.

Dr. Detfink wrote:Lemieux is CORRECT.

Get your head out of your a$$. Fighting is justified when referees fail to call on instigators like a Claude Lemieux for breaking the face of someone like Kris Draper in the playoffs and NO CALL when he cross checked. Cause Roy made a move when it was purely between McHarty and Lemiuex (who turtled as he did with Cam Neely)...

The fight btwn Pens and Isles had NOTHING at stake. NOTHING. The Isles once again SUCK (Knick fans should not complain next to an Isles fan). The Pens don't need any more injuries after Malkin.

THAT is what Super Mario is talking about.

Also fighting does not bring in more revenue. This is a corporate all families age. It works in Canada but Canada doesn't even factor in gate receipts. You know I still have my Quebec & Winnipeg NHL jerseys...

To Americans two white guys fighting on the ice is slightly elevated tractor pulls. As big of a hockey fan as I am, it just doesn't register with the paying customer. Dunno why but blood on the ice is not attracting them as it should...

MaseInYourFace wrote:Not familiar with what happened during Isles-Penguins game.

MaseInYourFace wrote:

wwtsm wrote:He said the punishments from the Isles-Penguins game were too soft. That was the best thing to happen to hockey in the last 3 years. This is the only time anyone has talked about the sport since I can remember and fighting makes the game more exctiting.

Gotta admit I'm an extremely casual hockey fan at best. Not familiar with what happened during Isles-Penguins game. But comment doesn't really surprise me coming from Lemiux. Lemiux was a megastar player and a finesse guy. These type of players are generally against the rougher aspects of hockey.