SB Nation User Blog: Resolute

Tony Gallagher Temper Tantrum Tour hits Tampa

Resolute — Sun, 05 Jul 2009 19:33:15 -0000

A popular former Canuck bolts somewhere else for a lot of money, therefore tampering MUST have been involved. Because really, everybody would rather be a Canuck.

For those of you that don't know who Tony Gallagher is, and be thankful that you don't, he's Vancouver's village idiot, and a guy whom even Vancouver hockey fans have trouble tolerating. His "The NHL hates Vancouver" tour came to Tampa today, as he wonders just how Mattias Ohlund, clearly a Canuck for life, could sign with Tampa, and sign so fast?

After all, Tampa is a perpetual revenue sharing recipient, and sells its tickets at $10 a pop! Oh yes, your favourite stereotypes fly fast and furious in this one. Oh, hey! Did you know a lot of retirees live in Tampa? Thanks Tony! Now I know where to move in 35 years!

Maybe Gallagher has a point. Maybe there was tampering involved. Or, maybe, the two sides just said "years, dollars, agreed" and did the final paperwork shortly after. As to Tony's question about why anyone would want to play in Tampa, it might have something to do with the fact the Lightning have had more success in 15 years in the NHL than the Canucks have in 40? After all, if you are looking for success, the left coast of Canada is about as far from it as you can get.

While he tries, I can only give Gallagher's performance in this piece 2 red lights out of seven (the Luongo Scale), as this episode of "Everyone Hates Vancouver" fell far short of last week's episode in which he actually argued that Vancouver Canuck fans were paying both for the Coyotes to take on a player (shock!) and for Calgary to sign Bouwmeester.

Stay tuned for next week's tour stop. Who will he take aim at next? Atlanta? Nashville? Los Angeles? Who knows!

Baby Flames on the move again

Resolute — Tue, 28 Apr 2009 18:57:24 -0000

http://www.bclocalnews.com/fraser_valley/abbynews/news/43887252.html

The AHL's board of governors has approved the Flames motion to transfer their top affiliate from the Quad Cities to Abbotsford. Should be interesting to see how well the team draws in enemy territory after disappointing stops in Omaha and Moline.

I also personally wonder if this will begin a move west for the AHL. Abbotsford is completely isolated right now, but one has to wonder if Victoria might push for a move up from the ECHL, and perhaps a couple California teams too?

Would be hilarious to see the Oilers move into Victoria, thus surrounding the Canucks. ;)

Eric Furlatt, Steven Walkom, and giving incompetent referees a free pass

Resolute — Tue, 31 Mar 2009 23:09:53 -0000

I wanted to mention this blog post from Five hole Fanatics about the nonsense that occurred in the Calgary-Minnesota game on Saturday, where referee Eric Furlatt made at least one, and probably two, horribly bad calls that cost the Flames goals:

http://www.fiveholefanatics.ca/2009/03/propaganda.html

Aside from how great the rant itself is, the animated gifs render Steven Walkom's defence of his official a complete joke.

This only highlights a serious problem the NHL currently faces, namely the competence of its officials. It is interesting that Walkom used the word "ballsy" to describe Furlatt's call on that play. Consider a dictionary.com definition of the word: "Very tough and courageous, often recklessly or presumptuously so." Do we really want refereens to be reckless or presumptuous? God help us.

And while these errors were fortunately made moot by the Flames 5th goal of the night finally counting, that does not change the fact that not only was this a terrible decision by Furlatt, but that it had potentially massive ramifications on the outcome of not only a game, but of a divisional race. And Walkom is defending this? Where is the accountability?

Interestingly, according to Fan960 following the game, Flames' associate coach Jim Playfair said that Fraser told him at the start of the third that Furlatt had been having a conversation with Glencross throughout the game about his standing in the crease, which raises questions about whether the referee made the call based on his issue with a player rather than the play. Fraser was also said to have disagreed with the call, and made sure that the officials came out onto the ice first, rather than hiding in the tunnels as they often do when they draw the ire of the fans, so that Furlatt could do a "lap of honour" prior to the third. i.e.: so that the crowd could let him know what they thought of the job he was doing. When Furlatt's own officiating partner wont stand up for him, that says something.

Sadly, it is only going to get worse. Some of the league's better referees are retiring, and while I don't know what the pipeline is like in the East or the US, I know the WHL's officials quite well, and believe me, there isn't exactly a bumper crop of quality officials coming up. In fact, the best of recent years, Rob Matsouka appears to be bogged down in the AHL, while inferior referees (Kyle Rehman) have already officiated some NHL games. Gotta wonder if politics is taking precedence over competence.

Two superstars facing off. This was after Iginla scored his 831st point and 400th goal... the...

Resolute — Mon, 02 Mar 2009 05:10:15 -0000

Two superstars facing off. This was after Iginla scored his 831st point and 400th goal... the picture of the latter event having been posted at Matchsticks and Gasoline.

Not the quality I wanted, but Jarome Iginla's shot on his 400th goal.

Resolute — Mon, 02 Mar 2009 05:04:50 -0000

Not the quality I wanted, but Jarome Iginla's shot on his 400th goal.

Boogaard gets 5 games for cheapshot

Resolute — Sat, 28 Feb 2009 22:12:03 -0000

http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/story/?id=269145&lid=headline&lpos=secStory_main

The very day that Witt gets five for a flagrant elbow to an opponents head, Derek Boogaard does the exact same thing. Better yet, a guy who plays 4 minutes a game was out late in a 4-1 loss. Gee, Lemaire, I wonder what it is you sent him out for, eh?

I don't think Boogaard belongs in this league... there are at least a thousand players in the minors who would be more useful as hockey players than he is. But at least Boogaard usually doesn't throw dirty hits like this, which really makes his, and Lemaire's, decision making in this case dissapointing.

And, Prust is now out with a concussion. The second time he's been injured via a cheapshot to the head, as Janssen broke his jaw earlier this year.

Boogaard gets 5 for cheapshot

Resolute — Sat, 28 Feb 2009 21:57:26 -0000

the link to the story at The Toronto Sports Network

Brandon Prust is out with a concussion - second time this season he has been injured as a result of a cheap shot. Warren Peters has been recalled to take his place.

Good on Campbell getting this one right, not that he had much choice given Boogaard pulled such a stupid stunt the very day Witt got 5 for a very similar attempt to injure elbow.

Oilers attempting to suppress critcism again

Resolute — Sun, 01 Feb 2009 05:14:30 -0000

Some of you may be aware of how Edmonton confined a fan to the dungeons of Rexall Place a couple years ago when he entered the arena wearing a "Trade Lowe" sign on the back of his jersey following the Ryan Smyth debacle.

Well, the Oilers continue to show they have the thinnest skin in pro sports, as they have now targetted a parody song created by Calgary's Fan960 radio that makes fun of their 10-2 loss. After a couple Edmonton stations picked up on it and played it up north, the Oilers phoned those stations demanding they stop playing it. They then complained to the league about Fan960 hosting it on their website. The league actually asked the station to pull it.

http://calsun.canoe.ca/Sports/Hockey/2009/01/31/8215761-sun.html

Fortunately, it's up on Youtube now, with video added by a fan, and is over 10,000 views as I type this... 9000 of which came AFTER Edmonton complained.

http://ca.youtube.com/watch?v=xYN1nQXfnc4

Well played, Edmonton. Well played.

Rule 99 lives again

Resolute — Fri, 25 Nov 2005 00:48:21 -0000

This year, an addendum to Rule 56, known as the Sutter Rule, was implemented taking aim at late game instigator penalties. It reads, in it's entirety:

(NEW for 2005-06) A player who is deemed to be the instigator of an altercation in the final five (5) minutes of regulation time or at any time in overtime, shall be assessed an instigator minor penalty, a major for fighting, a ten minute misconduct and an automatic one-game suspension. The length of suspension will double for each subsequent offense. In addition, the player's coach shall be fined $10,000 -- a fine that will double for each subsequent incident.

(NEW for 2005-06) (NOTE 1) No team appeals will be permitted either verbally or in writing regarding the assessment of this automatic suspension.

The NHL has made it clear that this penalty cannot be appealed, and made a sizeable issue out of this rule before the season began in it's misguided attempt at eliminating fighting from the game.

Two nights ago, this rule was to be put to the test for the first time, as Coyotes forward Shane Doan took an instigator at the end of a game filled with dirty hits. The rule makes it clear: Doan was to be suspended for one game, and the coach to be fined $10,000.

Except the coach in question is Wayne Gretzky.

Suddenly Colin Campbell decided that this rule is not as simple as it seems, and though it is not mentioned anywhere in the rule book, he now has discretion on whether to hand out the penalties. Campbell's excuse was that Doan isnt a goon, therefore the rule should not apply to him.

Please.

You think Campbell wouldnt have thought twice about the suspension and fine if it was Jarome Iginla and Darryl Sutter in question?

How about Mark Bell and Trent Yawney?

The NHL found itself caught in the embarrassing position of having to fine it's most notable personality for a rule it felt was extremely important four months ago, and somehow found an even more embarrassing excuse to avoid living up to it's own rules.

But then, there always was one rulebook for Gretzky, and one for everyone else.

Curse you SI...

Resolute — Fri, 14 Oct 2005 15:39:37 -0000

During the 2004 playoffs, Sports Illustrated had a difficult decision to make. They were going to put the Flames, who had just eliminated Detroit, on the cover of their magazine. Instead, they chose to put the NBA playoffs on the cover, and Flames fans couldn't have been more grateful.

We dodged the curse.

Not so this year. The Flames, SI's pick to win it all, are struggling to find their identity. Hell, the Flames are struggling to kill a penalty. Sitting at 1-3-1, the Flames are probably wishing the media pundits would have left them alone so that they could climb into a dark hole in peace.

Fortunately, Calgary has some company. SI's #2 pick? The Flyers. The team that SI called "Young, fast and ready to roll" have sputtered as well, stumbling out of the gates at 1-2-0. Even if one can only count the number of games played on one hand, who would have figured that Washington would have won more games than either the Flames or Flyers? Who would have figured the Capitals would win two games in the entire month?

The Lightning, SI's #4 pick, havent exactly wowed either, sporting a very pedestrian 2-2-1 record, in the very pedestrian Southwest Division.

The only team out of SI's top four that is doing well are the Ottawa Senators, the only undefeated team at 4-0. While at first thought it appears they have escaped the wrath of Sports Illustrated, you just know they are going to end up facing the Leafs in the playoffs, and have their hopes crushed just like ever year.

Thankfully, with a new edition on the stands, Sports Illustrated will have cast hockey to the shadows like it usually does, and the hockey world can right itself.

But until then, to add insult to injury, the New York rangers are 2-1-2 and leading the Atlantic. They were SI's pick to finish dead last.