Marchund deserved a little more in his defense from his mates...

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from Fletcher1. Show Fletcher1's posts

    Re: Marchund deserved a little more in his defense from his mates...

    In response to MeanE's comment:
    [QUOTE]

     


    A quick resfresher on Andrew Ference sticking up for teammates:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dgq09ydggQY

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_BrfKWwVNWk

    But no, I'm sure you're right about him lying about seeing the Volchenkov hit, because he was too just scared to fight him.  Your imagination about what happened should trump Ference telling us directly what happened, and what is apparent in the video.

    C'mon Mean, this is silly.  I get the anger, but it is misplaced here.

      

     

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from Fletcher1. Show Fletcher1's posts

    Re: Marchund deserved a little more in his defense from his mates...

    In response to MeanE's comment:

    In response to Fletcher1's comment:

     

    Seems like a fair analogy to me.  You're saying that when an opposing player hits a Bruin, and the Bruin is injured, his teammates should attack the opposing player whether they saw the hit or not.

     

    By that logic, you must be furious they didn't attack Colin Greening. 

     



    If you think it is a fair analogy, then you are an idiot as well!  Obviously you guys know the difference and just want to be a holes and try and get me to react.  It really is unbecoming of you.

     



    Why don't you just explain the difference then?  Three long time posters asking you to explain your argument and all you've done so far is call them 'idiots'.  Nobody has called you any names.

    If they should have attacked AV (without knowing what happened), why shouldn't they have attacked Greening too?  Its a fair question.

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from MeanE. Show MeanE's posts

    Re: Marchund deserved a little more in his defense from his mates...

    In response to Fletcher1's comment:

    In response to MeanE's comment:
    [QUOTE]

     


    A quick resfresher on Andrew Ference sticking up for teammates:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dgq09ydggQY

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_BrfKWwVNWk

    But no, I'm sure you're right about him lying about seeing the Volchenkov hit, because he was too just scared to fight him.  Your imagination about what happened should trump Ference telling us directly what happened, and what is apparent in the video.

    C'mon Mean, this is silly.  I get the anger, but it is misplaced here.

      

     



    Fletch - I already agreed with you regarding what Campbell & Ference have done in the past.  I don't have to watch the videos.  That has nothing to do with this incident.  I didn't say anyone was afraid to fight him. I don't know why they didn't act?  Do they not like Marchand?  Did they think that he was being a rat and embellishing?  I simply don't believe that they didn't know what happened and didn't have time to retaliate.  I didn't say that Ference saw the hit.  I have only stated that Jagr did, he reacted, which everyone could see and/or hear, and the other 3 on the ice should have been irate and at the very least tried to get a piece of Volchenkov.

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from MeanE. Show MeanE's posts

    Re: Marchund deserved a little more in his defense from his mates...

    In response to Fletcher1's comment:

     

    Why don't you just explain the difference then?  Three long time posters asking you to explain your argument and all you've done so far is call them 'idiots'.  Nobody has called you any names.

     

    If they should have attacked AV (without knowing what happened), why shouldn't they have attacked Greening too?  Its a fair question.



    Exactly, three long time posters that know the difference but just want to bust balls.  That's why I don't have to explain.  Answer your own questions.  Which hit was intentional?  Which hit that was intentional was seen by a Bruins player (Jagr)?  Which intentional hit was punished with a 4 game suspension?

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from lambda13. Show lambda13's posts

    Re: Marchund deserved a little more in his defense from his mates...

    MeanE I think you are wrong. Have you ever played hockey and been watching the puck when something happens just off focus? What if Marchand and Volchenkov collided? What if it was a clean hit and Jagr just didn't like the aggressive nature of the hit? Are you going to say that someone should jump any player that they think might have committed a foul? No one is trying to get you going, no one is trying to personally attack you, they are disagreeing with you. No need to be so defensive and get bent out of shape when people disagree with you.

     
  6. This post has been removed.

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from MeanE. Show MeanE's posts

    Re: Marchund deserved a little more in his defense from his mates...

    In response to lambda13's comment:

    MeanE I think you are wrong. Have you ever played hockey and been watching the puck when something happens just off focus? What if Marchand and Volchenkov collided? What if it was a clean hit and Jagr just didn't like the aggressive nature of the hit? Are you going to say that someone should jump any player that they think might have committed a foul? No one is trying to get you going, no one is trying to personally attack you, they are disagreeing with you. No need to be so defensive and get bent out of shape when people disagree with you.



    I don't care if people disagree with me, but please don't tell me people aren't trying to bust my balls by comparing the two hits, becasue it is not even close.  Yes I have been in that situation and I would assume that if a player the likes of Jagr especially has a problem with a hit, it needs to be addressed.  As I said I would rather err on the side of it was a clean hit and I over reacted to it, than to be on the ice and do absolutely nothing when my teammate got his dome drilled by a cheap hit!

     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from JWensink. Show JWensink's posts

    Re: Marchund deserved a little more in his defense from his mates...

    In response to MeanE's comment:

     

    In response to Fletcher1's comment:

     

     

    Why don't you just explain the difference then?  Three long time posters asking you to explain your argument and all you've done so far is call them 'idiots'.  Nobody has called you any names.

     

    If they should have attacked AV (without knowing what happened), why shouldn't they have attacked Greening too?  Its a fair question.

     



    Exactly, three long time posters that know the difference but just want to bust balls.  That's why I don't have to explain.  Answer your own questions.  Which hit was intentional?  Which hit that was intentional was seen by a Bruins player (Jagr)?  Which intentional hit was punished with a 4 game suspension?

     

     




    Mean

     

    Just accept the fact that half the posters on here will not type anything that ever is critical of the Bruins. This latest unemotional display of not defending a team mate goes back a long way. Just this year there have been more than a few, and after the Savard incident it would be nice to believe that that kind of thing was behind them, but sadly it's not. There was no mention from anyone but myself when earlier in the year Drew Stafford came across the ice and tried to take off Hamiltons head with a vicious elbow. There was no response, and that is unacceptable, and is a red flag to anyone who knows how to win and what it is to compete with character and emotion. Or the pathetic display by S.Thornton when he was so kind as to ask Neil if he did anything inappropriate to Kelly. Just lame as it gets. It's obvious that you are debating with those who don't have the the life experience to know any better. This is a team that threw 2 hits in the entire first period, and watched one of there own get a blatant head shot with intent to injure and did nothing. Those issues are one in the same. They did nothing when it happened -  they did nothing after it happened - they did nothing for the rest of the game after everyone knew what happened. It is a sympton of a much bigger problem - you are right to be outraged, but you're not going to get some of these yahoos to give in. There are some of us who know what you're jumping up and down about, and feel the exact same way. These are the same ding dongs who defended the Bruins reaction after the Savard hit.

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from 50belowzero. Show 50belowzero's posts

    Re: Marchund deserved a little more in his defense from his mates...

    In response to JWensink's comment:

    In response to MeanE's comment:

     

    In response to Fletcher1's comment:

     

     

    Why don't you just explain the difference then?  Three long time posters asking you to explain your argument and all you've done so far is call them 'idiots'.  Nobody has called you any names.

     

    If they should have attacked AV (without knowing what happened), why shouldn't they have attacked Greening too?  Its a fair question.

     



    Exactly, three long time posters that know the difference but just want to bust balls.  That's why I don't have to explain.  Answer your own questions.  Which hit was intentional?  Which hit that was intentional was seen by a Bruins player (Jagr)?  Which intentional hit was punished with a 4 game suspension?

     

     




    Mean

     

    Just accept the fact that half the posters on here will not type anything that ever is critical of the Bruins. This latest unemotional display of not defending a team mate goes back a long way. Just this year there have been more than a few, and after the Savard incident it would be nice to believe that that kind of thing was behind them, but sadly it's not. There was no mention from anyone but myself when earlier in the year Drew Stafford came across the ice and tried to take off Hamiltons head with a vicious elbow. There was no response, and that is unacceptable, and is a red flag to anyone who knows how to win and what it is to compete with character and emotion. Or the pathetic display by S.Thornton when he was so kind as to ask Neil if he did anything inappropriate to Kelly. Just lame as it gets. It's obvious that you are debating with those who don't have the the life experience to know any better. This is a team that threw 2 hits in the entire first period, and watched one of there own get a blatant head shot with intent to injure and did nothing. Those issues are one in the same. They did nothing when it happened -  they did nothing after it happened - they did nothing for the rest of the game after everyone knew what happened. It is a sympton of a much bigger problem - you are right to be outraged, but you're not going to get some of these yahoos to give in. There are some of us who know what you're jumping up and down about, and feel the exact same way. These are the same ding dongs who defended the Bruins reaction after the Savard hit.



    Good thing all of these well documented unemotional responses didn't affect them winning a cup in 2011. Hopefully we will get a repeat performance in 2013. Look i'm all for standing up when a teammate gets cheapshotted (is that a word?) and i for one wished there was a response to the Savard hit but with all hits come factors that play into it such as , who saw what, who did the hitting, who was on the ice, time of the game the hit happened, blowout game or tight game. Whichever way a fan wants to look at it and how they think the team should react is irrelevant because they aren't playing the game and do not know exactly what went on. The players on the ice do not have the benefit of replay at that exact moment.The B's are a tough team and if some fans want an opposing player beaten senseless at the first sign (if they saw it) of a sketchy hit, that is their right but i wouldn't go overboard and say that the team is not vested in one another or doesn't stick up for one another. 

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from MeanE. Show MeanE's posts

    Re: Marchund deserved a little more in his defense from his mates...

    In response to 50belowzero's comment:

    Good thing all of these well documented unemotional responses didn't affect them winning a cup in 2011. Hopefully we will get a repeat performance in 2013. Look i'm all for standing up when a teammate gets cheapshotted (is that a word?) and i for one wished there was a response to the Savard hit but with all hits come factors that play into it such as , who saw what, who did the hitting, who was on the ice, time of the game the hit happened, blowout game or tight game. Whichever way a fan wants to look at it and how they think the team should react is irrelevant because they aren't playing the game and do not know exactly what went on.  To me it is now relevant based on Claude's comments.  I understand that my opinion is irrelevant. The players on the ice do not have the benefit of replay at that exact moment.The B's are a tough team Debateable and if some fans want an opposing player beaten senseless at the first sign (if they saw it) of a sketchy hit, that is their right but i wouldn't go overboard and say that the team is not vested in one another or doesn't stick up for one another. You say overboard, I say fair criticism.

     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from 50belowzero. Show 50belowzero's posts

    Re: Marchund deserved a little more in his defense from his mates...

    In response to MeanE's comment:

    In response to 50belowzero's comment:

    Good thing all of these well documented unemotional responses didn't affect them winning a cup in 2011. Hopefully we will get a repeat performance in 2013. Look i'm all for standing up when a teammate gets cheapshotted (is that a word?) and i for one wished there was a response to the Savard hit but with all hits come factors that play into it such as , who saw what, who did the hitting, who was on the ice, time of the game the hit happened, blowout game or tight game. Whichever way a fan wants to look at it and how they think the team should react is irrelevant because they aren't playing the game and do not know exactly what went on.  To me it is now relevant based on Claude's comments.  I understand that my opinion is irrelevant. The players on the ice do not have the benefit of replay at that exact moment.The B's are a tough team Debateable and if some fans want an opposing player beaten senseless at the first sign (if they saw it) of a sketchy hit, that is their right but i wouldn't go overboard and say that the team is not vested in one another or doesn't stick up for one another. You say overboard, I say fair criticism.



    Hey Mean, i'm ok with that, thats what a discussion board is all about.  

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from dezaruchi. Show dezaruchi's posts

    Re: Marchund deserved a little more in his defense from his mates...

    In response to JWensink's comment:



    Mean

     

    Just accept the fact that half the posters on here will not type anything that ever is critical of the Bruins. This latest unemotional display of not defending a team mate goes back a long way. Just this year there have been more than a few, and after the Savard incident it would be nice to believe that that kind of thing was behind them, but sadly it's not. There was no mention from anyone but myself when earlier in the year Drew Stafford came across the ice and tried to take off Hamiltons head with a vicious elbow. There was no response, and that is unacceptable, and is a red flag to anyone who knows how to win and what it is to compete with character and emotion. Or the pathetic display by S.Thornton when he was so kind as to ask Neil if he did anything inappropriate to Kelly. Just lame as it gets. It's obvious that you are debating with those who don't have the the life experience to know any better. This is a team that threw 2 hits in the entire first period, and watched one of there own get a blatant head shot with intent to injure and did nothing. Those issues are one in the same. They did nothing when it happened -  they did nothing after it happened - they did nothing for the rest of the game after everyone knew what happened. It is a sympton of a much bigger problem - you are right to be outraged, but you're not going to get some of these yahoos to give in. There are some of us who know what you're jumping up and down about, and feel the exact same way. These are the same ding dongs who defended the Bruins reaction after the Savard hit.




    Good thing there's a poster like you that has the guts to say what needs to be said. You're a real difference maker here at the forum. The lone sane voice in the wilderness. The beacon of realism. The lighthouse in the stormy sea of insanity. Christ almighty, you need to get over yourself. This forum is built on people who trash the team, it's coaching staff and management. Frankly, you're neither original nor enlightening. The amount of times in which you've been proven totally wrong on here has led to you being worth nothing more than comedic fodder. The fact you consider yourself a groundbreaker only adds more to the laughs. Keep up the good work. I've really missed Howie Meeker so golly gee, you'll have to do.

     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from huscroft28. Show huscroft28's posts

    Re: Marchund deserved a little more in his defense from his mates...

    In response to MeanE's comment:

    In response to huscroft28's comment:

     

    I think the officials didn't help either.  Eight short-handed situations last night - on a few seemingly ridiculous calls.  The Bruins are probably expecting for the next call to go against them and not wanting to give the stripes any excuses to make another questionable call.

     



    If that is what is going through your head when your teammate is down on the ice from a dirty hit to the head, you need to check yourself!

     




    What I meant was that the constant and often ludicrous calls may be getting in their heads a bit - I didn't mean at that exact moment - as Bruins are one of the most penalized teams in the league, no?  If players on the ice saw the hit, then they absolutely should have responded and made Volchenkov turtle in the least.  I still think that players on the ice didn't see the hit and Marchand stayed on his feet before going down slowly.  Campbell had his back to the play - I've watched it a dozen times or more - players were more concerned with Marchand's health.

     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from Fletcher1. Show Fletcher1's posts

    Re: Marchund deserved a little more in his defense from his mates...

    In response to MeanE's comment:

     I don't know why they didn't act?  Do they not like Marchand?  Did they think that he was being a rat and embellishing?  


    You can certainly ask these questions, without any evidence to support them, but don't you think it is far more likely that the other guys didn't know what happened and were therefore slow to jump into a violent retaliation on the spot?  Sometimes the simplest explanation is the most likely one.  No real reason to think Ference is lying here, whether you like him or not.

    Listen Mean, I am not just trying to get you going with the Greening comparison.  I've got nothing against you and no reason to bait you.  I honestly don't know what the difference is.  You say that "one was intentional" but the entire point here is that the players didn't see it.  Therefore they would have no idea whether it was intentional or not.  We can see the differnce between the two hits now, easily, with replay.  But on the ice, at the time, nobody knew.  If you're saying they should have jumped AV, then they should have jumped Greening too.  They don't know what happened on either one.

     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from MeanE. Show MeanE's posts

    Re: Marchund deserved a little more in his defense from his mates...

    In response to 50belowzero's comment:


    Hey Mean, i'm ok with that, thats what a discussion board is all about.  

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Agreed.  

     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from MeanE. Show MeanE's posts

    Re: Marchund deserved a little more in his defense from his mates...

    In response to huscroft28's comment:

     

    What I meant was that the constant and often ludicrous calls may be getting in their heads a bit - I didn't mean at that exact moment - as Bruins are one of the most penalized teams in the league, no? (NO, actually they are 22 in the league) If players on the ice saw the hit, then they absolutely should have responded and made Volchenkov turtle in the least.  I still think that players on the ice didn't see the hit (I agree, except for Jagr and others that did not see should have reacted to Jagr) and Marchand stayed on his feet before going down slowly. (doesn't matter IMO if he stayed on his feet staggering or not)  Campbell had his back to the play - I've watched it a dozen times or more - players were more concerned with Marchand's health. (Could've been concerned after adressing AV as well)

    [/QUOTE]


     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from Fletcher1. Show Fletcher1's posts

    Re: Marchund deserved a little more in his defense from his mates...

    In response to JWensink's comment:

     

    Just accept the fact that half the posters on here will not type anything that ever is critical of the Bruins. This latest unemotional display of not defending a team mate goes back a long way. Just this year there have been more than a few, and after the Savard incident it would be nice to believe that that kind of thing was behind them, but sadly it's not. There was no mention from anyone but myself when earlier in the year Drew Stafford came across the ice and tried to take off Hamiltons head with a vicious elbow. There was no response, and that is unacceptable, and is a red flag to anyone who knows how to win and what it is to compete with character and emotion. Or the pathetic display by S.Thornton when he was so kind as to ask Neil if he did anything inappropriate to Kelly. Just lame as it gets. It's obvious that you are debating with those who don't have the the life experience to know any better. This is a team that threw 2 hits in the entire first period, and watched one of there own get a blatant head shot with intent to injure and did nothing. Those issues are one in the same. They did nothing when it happened -  they did nothing after it happened - they did nothing for the rest of the game after everyone knew what happened. It is a sympton of a much bigger problem - you are right to be outraged, but you're not going to get some of these yahoos to give in. There are some of us who know what you're jumping up and down about, and feel the exact same way. These are the same ding dongs who defended the Bruins reaction after the Savard hit.



    Oh boy, the perfect Wen-response.  I couldn't have done a better parody if I tried.

    -The usual whiny, victim mentality?  Check.

    -The imagined me-against-the-world drama? Check.

    -The demands for "toughness" in every situation whether it makes sense or not, or has anything to do with winning hockey games ("Seguin needs more PIMs!")? Check.

    -The delusions and made up info about other posters (name which posters defended the Savard response...) Check.

    Classic.  But MeanE doesn't deserve to get lumped in with the drama queen here.

     

     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from MeanE. Show MeanE's posts

    Re: Marchund deserved a little more in his defense from his mates...

    In response to Fletcher1's comment:

    In response to MeanE's comment:

     

     I don't know why they didn't act?  Do they not like Marchand?  Did they think that he was being a rat and embellishing?  

     

     


    You can certainly ask these questions, without any evidence to support them, but don't you think it is far more likely that the other guys didn't know what happened and were therefore slow to jump into a violent retaliation on the spot? (should you really wait to be a judge when it is your #1 goal scorer?)  Sometimes the simplest explanation is the most likely one.  No real reason to think Ference is lying here, whether you like him or not. (As I have said before, I like Ference, I was part of a team for his first professional game played, I liked him then and still do.  Correct me if I am wrong, but hasn't Ference been critical publicly of Marchand's antics in the past?  This makes me question his response)

    Listen Mean, I am not just trying to get you going with the Greening comparison.  I've got nothing against you and no reason to bait you.  I honestly don't know what the difference is.  You say that "one was intentional" but the entire point here is that the players didn't see it.  (You say the palyers didn't see it, I say that Jagr did and based on his reaction the other 3 players should've known) Therefore they would have no idea whether it was intentional or not.  We can see the differnce between the two hits now, easily, with replay. (We could also see the difference between the two without replay, I don't know anyone that saw the hit on Bergeron live, it was pretty clear that the hit on Marchand was dirty on the live broadcast)  But on the ice, at the time, nobody knew ( Jagr Knew).  If you're saying they should have jumped AV, then they should have jumped Greening too.  They don't know what happened on either one.




     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from huscroft28. Show huscroft28's posts

    Re: Marchund deserved a little more in his defense from his mates...

    In response to MeanE's comment:

    In response to huscroft28's comment:

     

    What I meant was that the constant and often ludicrous calls may be getting in their heads a bit - I didn't mean at that exact moment - as Bruins are one of the most penalized teams in the league, no? (NO, actually they are 22 in the league) If players on the ice saw the hit, then they absolutely should have responded and made Volchenkov turtle in the least.  I still think that players on the ice didn't see the hit (I agree, except for Jagr and others that did not see should have reacted to Jagr) and Marchand stayed on his feet before going down slowly. (doesn't matter IMO if he stayed on his feet staggering or not)  Campbell had his back to the play - I've watched it a dozen times or more - players were more concerned with Marchand's health. (Could've been concerned after adressing AV as well)




    [/QUOTE]

    Nice red pen.  I guess I've been scolded ... I should be standing in the corner, probably.  

    Regardless, I don't agree with you or your all-knowing self on this issue - the players didn't see what happened.  Can I be dismissed at the bell or do I need more lecturing?

     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from Fletcher1. Show Fletcher1's posts

    Re: Marchund deserved a little more in his defense from his mates...

    Again, the question is not whether we would have liked to see a Bruin player beat the tar out of AV.  I think we would.  All of us.

    But I know I was watching the game, without any distraction, and I didn't realize exactly what happened to Marchand until they showed the replay.  As far as I knew it could have been a high stick that got him, an ankle twist, whatever.  After watching the replay, I was pissed.  And AV was in the tunnel...

     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from MeanE. Show MeanE's posts

    Re: Marchund deserved a little more in his defense from his mates...

    In response to huscroft28's comment:

     



    Nice red pen.  I guess I've been scolded ... I should be standing in the corner, probably.  

    Regardless, I don't agree with you or your all-knowing self on this issue - the players didn't see what happened.  Can I be dismissed at the bell or do I need more lecturing?

    [/QUOTE]

    Red font is not meant to be portrayed as an all knowing teacher scolding.  I just found it easier to respons directly to your post.  Sorry if it is offensive, not meant to be.  You say players didn't see it.  Do you believe Jagr did?  If you feel that he didn't, than I would like to hear what your reasoning is behind someone like Jagr going over to AV and bumping him?  I don't need you to agree, we can disagree, that's not a bad thing.  I have simply tried to analyze the situation and provide my side of the story.  Brad Marchand happens to be my binky and I believe he is a huge part of the Bruins success and I am not happy with their response and don't completely buy their explanations for a lack of one.  Am I all-knowing because I feel this way?  

     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from JWensink. Show JWensink's posts

    Re: Marchund deserved a little more in his defense from his mates...

    In response to Fletcher1's comment:

    In response to JWensink's comment:

     

     

    Just accept the fact that half the posters on here will not type anything that ever is critical of the Bruins. This latest unemotional display of not defending a team mate goes back a long way. Just this year there have been more than a few, and after the Savard incident it would be nice to believe that that kind of thing was behind them, but sadly it's not. There was no mention from anyone but myself when earlier in the year Drew Stafford came across the ice and tried to take off Hamiltons head with a vicious elbow. There was no response, and that is unacceptable, and is a red flag to anyone who knows how to win and what it is to compete with character and emotion. Or the pathetic display by S.Thornton when he was so kind as to ask Neil if he did anything inappropriate to Kelly. Just lame as it gets. It's obvious that you are debating with those who don't have the the life experience to know any better. This is a team that threw 2 hits in the entire first period, and watched one of there own get a blatant head shot with intent to injure and did nothing. Those issues are one in the same. They did nothing when it happened -  they did nothing after it happened - they did nothing for the rest of the game after everyone knew what happened. It is a sympton of a much bigger problem - you are right to be outraged, but you're not going to get some of these yahoos to give in. There are some of us who know what you're jumping up and down about, and feel the exact same way. These are the same ding dongs who defended the Bruins reaction after the Savard hit.

     



    Oh boy, the perfect Wen-response.  I couldn't have done a better parody if I tried.

     

    -The usual whiny, victim mentality?  Check.

    -The imagined me-against-the-world drama? Check.

    -The demands for "toughness" in every situation whether it makes sense or not, or has anything to do with winning hockey games ("Seguin needs more PIMs!")? Check.

    -The delusions and made up info about other posters (name which posters defended the Savard response...) Check.

    Classic.  But MeanE doesn't deserve to get lumped in with the drama queen here.

     



    "What do you want, someone to find him in the parking lot?

    The guys on the ice didn't see it and then Volchenkov got kicked out of the game. "

    Fletch the liar

     

    Well can't help yourself I see...please tell us how you know what the players on the ice saw. Or is it just another one of your fabrications?  Check

    There were countless posters who said that it was about the two points, and that nobody saw it on the ice when Savard went down, any honest poster on this board will verify that - total nonsense without any reality at all , I see a pattern developing - Check

    "The demands for "toughness" in every situation whether it makes sense or not, or has anything to do with winning hockey games ("Seguin needs more PIMs!")?"

    Never said that Seguin needs more PIMs, never said it, I said that he rarely takes penalties due to playing with an edge in his game...another lie from the liar  - Check 

    Toughness has everything to do with winning...That's what a loser can't understand  - Check

    Everything you just said is a lie -  you are a proven liar - talk about a parody

    checkmate

     

     

     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from kelvana33. Show kelvana33's posts

    Re: Marchund deserved a little more in his defense from his mates...

    AV got 4 games. Seems about right.

     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from MeanE. Show MeanE's posts

    Re: Marchund deserved a little more in his defense from his mates...

    In response to Fletcher1's comment:

    Again, the question is not whether we would have liked to see a Bruin player beat the tar out of AV.  I think we would.  All of us.

    But I know I was watching the game, without any distraction, and I didn't realize exactly what happened to Marchand until they showed the replay.  As far as I knew it could have been a high stick that got him, an ankle twist, whatever.  After watching the replay, I was pissed.  And AV was in the tunnel...



    When you watch the video of the hit.  Doc is talking about kessel's sister, Marchand is drilled, within 6 seconds waiting for doc to finish, without the benefit of instant replay Eddie O saw what I saw and says "boy high hit here by anton volchankov...he leads with his elbow...this should be a five minute penalty"  As he says this Jagr bumps AV as the players gather around him then the linesman grabs him by the arm to usher him away.  Why didn't anyone try to get to him while that was happening?  They should have been pissed enough like you after seeing the replay that they at the very least tried to get to him!  Nobody even tried to get a piece even after teh guy is getting escorted off the ice,when by then everyone knows it was a cheap shot!

     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from SanDogBrewin. Show SanDogBrewin's posts

    Re: Marchund deserved a little more in his defense from his mates...

                                  Points arew a premium you know!

     

Share