About last night …

Any shrinks or dream interpreters out there?

I had a dream last night in which Alex Kovalev is standing on a downtown street and I’m looking up at him. Overhead, the clear blue sky is filled with exotic kites.

I’m mesmerized. But a certain point, Kovalev, quite annoyed, demands to  know: "What are you staring at?"

Then the focus shifts to Guy Carbonneau’s press scrum. In shirtsleeves and sweating profusely, Carbonneau is asked if his greatest coaching achievement has been successfully motivating Kovalev. Carbo starts to answer, but I woke up.


I have no clue … unless the kites represent the lofty aspirations of Canadiens fans eight days ago. 


That’s when the team easily beat the New York Islanders to move within three points of Ottawa in the Eastern Conference standings.

But a week ago Canadiens lost to the Rangers.

Tuesday they beat the Senators, who were playing without Daniel Alfredsson and Dany Heatley but still mounted a third-period comeback.

Thursday night at the Bell Centre, Canadiens lost ignominiously to one of  the worst team in the NHL.

And then they went to Ottawa.

I’ll not dwell on last night’s  game. It was on RDS and the CBC, so most everyone saw it.

In the wilds of Kanata where no one could hear the screams, Heatley, Alfredsson and Jason Spezza bent our first-place aspirants over a log.

And if you think that metaphor is ugly or inappropriate, you didn’t see the game.

I don’t know why Carbo broke up his best defence pairing. But Mike Komisarek and Francis Bouillon started the game, and ach of them was minus-two before the game was two minutes old.

The Tomas Plekanec line started against Spezza et al –  and that was a mismatch. Ottawa pressured Plekanec all through the game, forcing him to make hasty decisions and errant passes. You can bet that technique will be employed by other teams.

The power play scored once in seven opportunities. The best player on the ice when Canadiens had the man advtantage was Chris Kelly, who plays for Ottawa.

Adding inury to insult,  Wade Redden, pissed-off by all the trade speculation in Ottawa, took itout on Sergei Kostitsyn. 

Glimmers of hope? Not many.

Carey Price was OK. The reunited Saku Koivu line had its moments – but Christopher Higgins is having less luck scoring than I used to on Crescent St. Canadiens hit the goalposts five times. Roman Hamrlik will be back soon.

No need to panic – yet. Teams and their fans survive the long NHL season by not getting too high or too low.

All that talk about first place was too high.

We’ll find out in Florida just how low Canadiens are about to go. 


  1. ebk says:


    let’s get serious, the massive size of your ego, dictates that you will keep responding to whatever I post. That you would let a chance pass to display your superior intellect is as absurd as most of the conclusions you spout in your post.

    Seriously, I would imagine the size of head needed to house that super computer brain of yours is enormous. Yet, you are still able to jam it so far up your butt that it makes it impossible for you to come up with anything but completely laughable conclusions.

    How can a person as smart as you keep getting everything wrong. You are not really displaying Sherlock Holmes like skills of deduction. Could be that having your head that far implanted in your butt, you are not getting the needed airflow to that super computer. Not to mention that your mind reading skills need a little work as well. A quick phone call to Chris Angel should help you out there.

    I imagine you are well on your way to earning your merit badge for courage as a keyboard commando. I for one can vouch that you sit bravely behind your computer and courageously answer each and every bell. Kudos to you. It is actually quite impressive. Where I come from we have different ways to define courage but this new definition the keyboard commandos have is more inclusive and easier to achieve. It allows a lot more people to get their merit badge for courage. Which is a good thing these days.

    I look forward to your reply and let’s not kid ourselves, your ego dictates another attack. It will be interesting to see if your powers of deduction improve and you can actually get something right. It has to be your powers of deduction that are off because the only other explanation is that you are amazingly intellectually dishonest when you post.

  2. Yeats says:


    I was going to let your post above go without a reply, but then I just said, “Nah!”

    You really missed to flight deck on the point of my response. You may actually want to go back and reread it. As you will see, I did not say equivalent. I said “moral” equivalent. I did not mean that you literally took out Moey’s eye with a paper clip. The point was that instead of apologizing to the injured party, i.e. Moey, you chose to suck up to the person in a perceived position of authority Boone. You may want to consult a 5th grade language arts book on the use of adjectives. They can make quite a difference and clearly did in the case above.

    More importantly though, this is at least the third time in less than a month when you have posted something on HIO and subsequently backed away from it. A few weeks ago you posted something that you thought might annoy me. Upon reflection, you contacted me directly, something no fellow poster has ever done, because you were evidently concerned that I might be upset. During Boone’s blog during the disastrous game against the Senators, you joined in a fray that I was having with another poster, Moey. The next day you thought better of it and penned a half-hearted apology to Boone. Finally, you posted your stepson’s photo on HIO for reasons that are well known by now. The minute a well-regarded poster called you on it, you removed it immediately.

    You do these things and the minute someone goes back at you with any vigor, you collapse faster than the French Army in WWII. “I don’t want to get into a cyber argument, boo hoo hoo.” “I didn’t mean to offend you.” Moose muffins!!! I’m sure someone far more famous than me said it first. The major risk in attempting to be loved by all is that you will be loved by no one.

    Thanks for reading. Have a nice day. Double tee, tee.

    P.S. If you have a decent Thesaurus handy, look up related words under “stupid.” I’m sure even you will get the point.

  3. ebk says:

    So my statement to moey was the equivalent of knocking her eye out. You are kidding right, that is the most ridiculous thing I have heard in a long time. If I thought I owed her an apology, I would have made one.

    Hard to take you seriously, when you make a statement as stupid as that.

    Again, I’m not really into these internet squabbles, so I’ll leave it at that.

    Take Care

  4. Yeats says:

    When you raise such issues in a public forum such as HIO, you should expect them to be addressed in public as well. I’m not a big fan of throwing a hand grenade on the blog and then saying we’ll just discuss it in private. I may be out of bounds at times, but I stand by what I say. My real identity is right there for all to see. I don’t hide behind my initials. That was the basic problem I had with your apology the other day. It was disgustingly self-serving. Instead of apologizing to the truely aggrieved party Moey, you chose to apologize to Boone. It was the moral equivalent of a kid in Catholic grade school whole shoots a paper clip and knocks out another kid’s eye, but rather than consoling the person he cyclopsed runs up to the teacher and says, “Sr. Mary Veronica, I’m soooo sorry.” Moey, who I have had run-ins with before, may not be the second coming of Scotty Bowman, but she nailed you perfectly boyo. Personally, I have a hell of a lot more respect for her than I have for you.

  5. ebk says:

    Seems the post I made is either getting misread, misunderstood or misrepresented. I thought I would answer you to clarify and then hopefully we can all let this issue drop.

    I never asked for having that word or any other word banned. I am a firm believer of free speech. It is one of the hallmarks of a truly free society. I never in any way asked anyone to rally against another member of the HIO community. I have never told anyone that they should not post on HIO because I disagree with their choice of words or posts. There are enough people around to do that and I don’t need to add to it.

    I am not perfect and do not expect others to be, I simply posted it last week after something offended me, which last time I checked, I was free to do so. Just the same as the people who posted the words that offended me. By telling of my experiences, I hoped people would think twice before using a word like that but again in no way did I call for a ban of it. This word and a whole number of other words are used to denigrate and dehumanize another individual. I try not to use them but it is a personal choice and one that I in no way have ever tried to impose on another individual.

    The last part of your post left me scratching my head as to your point. Basically what I think you say is that you believe people who have died of cancer would agree with you that trying to ban the use of the word cancer should not be done and that they would further agree with you that any attempt to do so would be seen as manipulative and self-serving.

    The only way I can address this, is to once again state I asked for no word to be banned from this site. I have not, nor will I ever do that. I have no way to dispute your suggestion that people who passed away from cancer would agree with you, as I am not able to channel them to find out. I am not a psychic medium and as such I have no way to confirm or refute your statement. I also would not feel comfortable enough to assume that I could or should speak for them. I only speak for myself.

    If you actually think that the word cancer carries the same negative and derogatory stereotypes as the other word, well again that is your opinion. I find the comparison ludicrous but that is just my opinion.

    This will be my last post on this subject. Yeats is correct, this is not the proper forum for this debate. He has my email address and if you wish to discuss it further, I would suggest that is where we continue it.


  6. cournoyer12 says:

    Thats why I wanted Getzlaf a few years ago, we the put Koivu on a second line, and Pleks third. Imagine us down the middle then? Bet Gainey wishes he could have that selection to do over again.

  7. Yeats says:

    It’s covered under freedom of speech. How you can have philosophical differences with that just leaves me scratching my head. But then again, I’m an American, not a Canadian.

Leave a Comment

You must be logged in to post a comment.