More Hockeybuzz Crap

[Stoner]

Inkman,

 

I have followed your replies to different issues for several issues, and it seems as though you take a decidely anti-Sabres stance on a lot of issues. How anyone can defend Garrioch is beyond comprehension. He crossed the line on several fronts and capped it by taking a potshot at the Sabres' owner. Maybe if he had shown more professionalism, class, and objectivity, he would he been shown the same by Sylvester. My initial reaction was that he was a shill for the Senators, and intended to provoke a predictable response from the Sabres broadcast team.

 

I am all for constructive debate utilizing logic and reasoning, not bandwangonesque cheerleading, but it seems as though some bloggers (like yourself) enjoy taking the contrarian view, however wrong, just for the sake of standing out by having a minority opinion.

 

 

I agree. :)

 

Inkman, what's your problem!

 

Seriously, speaking of objectivity, Garrioch had the perfect response to Ray's question: "What if YOU had lost Dany Heatley on a hit like that?" (Paraphrasing). Garrioch said HE wouldn't have lost Heatley. The exchange shows Ray as the shill and Garrioch as the independent media person. I think that clash of roles is exactly why the interview fell apart, although is was interesting to watch.

 

By the way, I wonder if any professional sports team has ever hired real journalists for their postgame show and given them free editorial reign. I think it would be awesome and I'm sure ratings would go up. Teams should stop trying to control public opinion. In this era of the Internet, it's not going to happen.

[jad1]

I agree. :)

 

Inkman, what's your problem!

 

Seriously, speaking of objectivity, Garrioch had the perfect response to Ray's question: "What if YOU had lost Dany Heatley on a hit like that?" (Paraphrasing). Garrioch said HE wouldn't have lost Heatley. The exchange shows Ray as the shill and Garrioch as the independent media person. I think that clash of roles is exactly why the interview fell apart, although is was interesting to watch.

 

By the way, I wonder if any professional sports team has ever hired real journalists for their postgame show and given them free editorial reign. I think it would be awesome and I'm sure ratings would go up. Teams should stop trying to control public opinion. In this era of the Internet, it's not going to happen.

 

Yeah, Garrioch wasn't defending Neil <_< . And Drury didn't have his helmet strapped on right. :thumbdown:

 

Every skater in the league has the opportunity to throw a hit like that. Every skater has the opportunity to light up a player during an icing race. Yet, thankfully, the number of players that get their skulls cracked open or end end up with broken arms on an icing play are rare.

 

99% of the players get it. Just because it might be technically legal to hit a guy who's in a vulnerable position, doesn't mean you throw the hit. Chris Neil isn't in that majority. If you're timing the Drury hit with a stopwatch or counting film frames, you're working too hard to protect this a-hole.

 

I doubt that any non-Ottawa reporters were reaching for their stopwatches upon viewing the hit. The majority of people could figure out what this guy was doing.

[drnkirishone]

I'll say it for like a 5th time.................. how many seconds that pass are pretty meaningless in this faster, quicker NHL. Look at the distance Neil and even Janssen covered to make the hits.

[Wraith]

I'll say it for like a 5th time.................. how many seconds that pass are pretty meaningless in this faster, quicker NHL. Look at the distance Neil and even Janssen covered to make the hits.

 

More over, the charging rule doesn't refer to time AT ALL. Simply distance, regardless of puck possession.

[Bmwolf21]

Seriously, speaking of objectivity, Garrioch had the perfect response to Ray's question: "What if YOU had lost Dany Heatley on a hit like that?" (Paraphrasing). Garrioch said HE wouldn't have lost Heatley. The exchange shows Ray as the shill and Garrioch as the independent media person. I think that clash of roles is exactly why the interview fell apart, although is was interesting to watch.

Please. Garrioch acted no more like an independent media person than Sylvester did, evidenced by his unprovoked attack on Golisano's letter. His response to Ray's question was a lame attempt to reestablish himself as the independent journalist, and in my eyes, the damage was already done.

 

By the way, I wonder if any professional sports team has ever hired real journalists for their postgame show and given them free editorial reign. I think it would be awesome and I'm sure ratings would go up. Teams should stop trying to control public opinion. In this era of the Internet, it's not going to happen.

While the idea of a no-spin show is interesting, it has about as much chance of happening as the NHL taking a real stance on player punishment. There is no way that a journalist would risk both his/her current and future access for a team-run show, and there is no way that a team would risk giving free editorial rein to the show.

[inkman]

Inkman,

 

I have followed your replies to different issues for several issues, and it seems as though you take a decidely anti-Sabres stance on a lot of issues.

This is the only part of your statement I want to reply to. This is where I think I am taking a decidedly neutral stance and trying to analyze things as objectively as possible.

 

Whenever I do, I get attacked by the blue and gold lens wearers. I won't align myself with one party just because I like to see them win hockey games.