JohnBellyful - (JB)Member since September 25, 2010
Habs fan since: 1960
Favorite current player:
All-time favorite player: Jean Beliveau
-- "A little song, a little dance, A little seltzer down your pants." --
- Comment on Lines taking shape as Habs prepare to face Blackhawks (with video) (2014-10-01 02:10:09)
Thanks, sly. I'd hate to imagine what this site would be like without the humour, from the likes of Cal, Mattyleg, HabinBurlington, Dipsy Doodler, Luke, Johnny Larue, Lafleur Guy, Hab10912, and Al. I mean, et al.
- Comment on Lines taking shape as Habs prepare to face Blackhawks (with video) (2014-10-01 01:45:57)
OMG, did you not even recognize the attempt at humour? To treat a serious subject with a light touch? Far be it from me to disparage you from writing about whatever subject you choose. But if you care to add something new to the debate that hasn't been said, or that I missed, go right ahead, if it helps with everyone's understanding of the issue. In fact, you can say the same things that have been said countless times before on this site if you wish. I've been known to repeat myself on occasion. Anything, I guess, to keep the thread alive with posts, even when the material is moribund from repetition. Which, I hasten to add, can be given new life if stated differently, or with updated content. I was merely expressing an opinion, taking advantage of that very privilege you so eloquently defend and is available to all of us here. All I suggested was that the matter be given a rest, not placed in moratorium, a suggestion you have every right to ignore, and have chosen to exercise. As for your advice to "suck it up" -- that's the best you have to offer? [And the poetry and song spoofs? I've quit posting my lyrical contributions to this site. You see, I was sensitive to the offence they gave to posters such as yourself. Now it looks like I'll have to add prose to the list as well.] BTW you also missed the whole point of the post, which was an appeal for some sort of statistical tool to help decide the question of fighting's role in hockey by using numbers. Is its importance understated or overstated? Anything that will help advance the argument one way or the other. Or at the very least, provide new ground to cover for those many more posts still to come on a subject near and dear to our hearts. I'll probably have a thing or two to say as well. Maybe even a limerick.
- Comment on Lines taking shape as Habs prepare to face Blackhawks (with video) (2014-10-01 01:12:37)
Duly noted. Correction: dully noted And the omission has been mitted
- Comment on Lines taking shape as Habs prepare to face Blackhawks (with video) (2014-10-01 00:59:00)
"I went to a fight and a hockey game broke out." -- that is the classic punch line.
- Comment on Lines taking shape as Habs prepare to face Blackhawks (with video) (2014-10-01 00:22:29)
A poster earlier today said he was bwoared by the endless debate over fighting on this site while placing himself clearly in the pro-fisticuffs ring. I, too, have grown weary of how often this divisive issue crops up and fractures the amity that normally distinguishes this forum [he says, as he nibbles on a digestive that's been dipped in chamomile herbal tea]. I am not an advocate of fighting – the tea gave it away, didn't it? -- but I will tolerate those rare occasions when the flare-up is a settling of accounts between a player who's been assaulted and his assailant; victims of Lucic spears, for example, would have the force of law behind their actions if they, in self-defence against further acts of savagery, now and in future, were to administer swift retribution. My concern with these recurring contretemps over the place of punch-ups in hockey is just that, they're recurring, without anything materially new being added to the discussion, or any kind of consensus being achieved. Here are the arguments for and against fighting, largely gleaned from today's readings, and quite familiar to long-time members of HIO, even those with short memories. Fighting is necessary because it: exacts revenge (even when the 'offence' was a perfectly legal body check); deters cheap shots; intimidates rivals; instills confidence by opening up space for offensively gifted forwards; spares stars having to engage in skirmishes (nothing worse than when your best player comes down with a bad case of the scuffles); changes momentum; entertains; gives the fans what they want; doesn't seem to concern the players much so why should it bother us; is part of tradition, and; releases pent-up anger that, if denied, would result in violent stick work. There might be other reasons but I believe those just enumerated capture the essence of what the pro-fighting lobby has to say. As for the the anti-fighting faction, you can insert 'doesn't' a few times in the aforeseaid, such as it doesn't deter cheap shots, doesn't change momentum, and doesn't intimidate rivals, to demonstrate this side's refusal to accept assertions by the other side as fact. The pacifist group – the namby-pamby Bambis – would also argue, when they're not knitting, making floral centrepieces or participating in senseless protests to bring down capitalism, that fighting: can lead to injury (sometimes debilitating in the long term); has no place in a society that likes to think of itself as civilized; should not be given a free pass because those involved in the game are too witless to recognize what's in their own best interests as healthy, human beings, and; disgraces those who commit or condone violence. With all that being said, I, for one, would love to have all that not being said again. In other words, give the subject a rest – until something new is brought to the discussion. Like actual facts, the kind the analytics bunch work with. Is there no Corsi or Fenwick out there who can shed light on the actual value fighting has in hockey? Someone who can provide solid, numerical evidence of how important fighting is in determining the outcome of games. Someone who can answer exactly these kinds of questions: What was a team's plus or minus before and after a fight instigated by one of its players? What was the shot differential before and after? What are teams' win-loss record in games when there has been a fight? Which their player won? Or lost? How many slashing, spearing, cross-checking, checks to the head and boarding penalties were called before a fight, and after? I know the time at which these fights occur in a game needs to be considered as well, which just adds another layer to the depth of research required to make sense of fighting's importance to hockey. Also, what is the incidence of fighting in games officiated by each of the referees? If the data shows a rate much higher than the norm for certain referees, that would suggest they're not as ept, if I may be so bold as to coin a word, in keeping a lid on simmering feelings of anger that threaten to boil over. Other questions come to mind but the buzzer just sounded, telling me my laundered socks have finished drying in the microwave. Good night/morning.
- Comment on Lines taking shape as Habs prepare to face Blackhawks (with video) (2014-09-30 15:20:11)
I don't have a neck beard, but I useta have a back rug I'd vacuum now and then.
- Comment on Lines taking shape as Habs prepare to face Blackhawks (with video) (2014-09-30 15:09:08)
Bournival has switched hockey gloves, to add a little more punch to his shots
- Comment on Game Within the Game: Habs’ Galchenyuk at centre (2014-09-30 10:07:55)
Feel the same way. I thought he'd be better, too, especially going through the neutral zone.
- Comment on Game Within the Game: Habs’ Galchenyuk at centre (2014-09-30 09:36:46)
So, it's agreed, then, hockey fans are getting rogered?
- Comment on Game Within the Game: Habs’ Galchenyuk at centre (2014-09-30 09:29:58)
Seein' PJ in a cheerleader's outfit wavin' pom-poms -- what's not to like? Or how 'bout a pyramid, with a Cherry on the top?