Time For Don Cherry To Give Up The Pro-War Talk
- Thread starter dumpthemonarchy
- Start date
Well maybe he doesn't want too.
SAY WHAAAAAAT!
Best way... tune out.
Mob Rule?
And if people power does not go the way you wish and goes against you... what then?
I ought to have said, say what you want on the public airwaves with an audience of millions, although the web does work against that. But anyone can get a blog, not everyone can get on TV.
Political people power that is responsible, constant ranting is the source of mob rule, especially talking about war. So you like war talk, I'm against it in an unfettered way which is what Cherry wants. To talk about war is to want one, can be arranged.
lots of concussions back then, it was called 'getting your bell wrung', no time off, just play.
nhl should be the instigators, but they don't give out enough suspensions, or long enough ones.
referees do not give out enough major penalties, and game misconducts for those hits.
there should be no instigators, that would be going back to the violence of the old days, body guards,(but those players were only goons, no more goons, everyone can
play now, and skate, we don't want those players back in the league.)
there are no more enforcers, just some bigger players, but they aren't enforcers,
they are players.
etc., the NHL must be that protection, but when.
the problem in the league right now, is poor refereeing, the game is too fast
for them.
too fast for don cherry too.
We can't go back to the old days, the game is better and faster now, all the players have ability. But heavily penalizing harsh head shots doesn't seem that radical, players know full well what is a cheap shot. Players are not slow out of shape office workers, they have quite precise control over their bodies and where they put them at any given moment. They don't want to lose their big pay cheques.
One of the major problems is that the ice is too small and the players are so huge and very fast, they ought to go to four on four for the whole game. I heard Cherry suggest this for the next All-star game and I was shocked. He, like me, has no time for the All star game. But this was a weird suggestion-kind of anti-fighting/violence from Mr Code. And he doesn't like the European sized rink-which I do.
Well that is your opinion. My point was that cultures clash and it was against our culture to be non-responsive after an attack. We were asked to respect their culture when they have ZERO respect for other peoples cultures.
Take the example of Yom Kippur. One of the holiest of Jewish holidays and the Egyptians chose that day to attack Israel in 73'.
This western guilt thing is getting boring.
I'm always amused by the 'little added comment from many about the 'pay cheque', as there are many
who seem so jealous of the salaries the players receive, why is that, I can never understand that
analogy at all.
all head shots are not caused from carelessness, they do have to be broken down into catagories.
At the high speed of the game, different situations cause same results.
That is why it is difficult to issue suspensions to all who have been the 'hitter' in these injuries.
Most are obvious, not all, some are pure accidents.
And surprisingly I find that there are many differing views of same incidents throughout the 'so called'
experts, so that in itself is puzzling.
Four on four is OK for short periods of time, but having watched 'that' number play many many times,
I find that there is too much ice, and it is hard to 'get' the puck, hence one team can control the
game too long at a time, making the game rather one sided for one side, then same for the other.
I don't like european hockey on the big ice, same situation as four on four, too much room between
players, long passes, corners too far from the goal, and the excitement of the game, 'in my opinion,
is reduced.
I think that there has been improvement, but nothing changes overnight, and nhl must continue going
down the road they are right now, and keep tweaking the rule 're headshots' till the players have
made the adjustment to a point that is much improved.
The NHL players association has an agreement, (and insist) that the nhl do not give out long suspensions
to players, so nhl s hands are tied when suspending players, and they cannot give out suspension past
certain numbers of games. don't know how that applies to players who re offend, but hopefully that
rule softens so that harsher suspensions can be given to them.
The pay cheque is not irrelevent because it is so high. A year or two in the NHL and you are set for life. In the 1970s this was not the case and made the game much different. The average yearly salary is now $2 million per year. Gretzky made "only" $200,000 in the 1980s.
Crosby's shot was not an accident. The NFL protects its stars and look how popular they are. No contest. No worries here about a code or tradition, just make the game watchable for fans. They have so many franchises worth over a billion bucks.
I don't know if 4 on 4 is a solution because there is so much space out there and a power play almost assures a goal. The NHL had the chance in the 1990s to expand the size of the rinks when so many new buildings were being constructed, but no, they had to keep everything the same. So now injuries are getting worse as players are bigger and better. So the joke on the NHL because the rinks shrunk because players grew. The NHL is a very reactive league.
Crosby's shot was not an accident. The NFL protects its stars and look how popular they are. No contest. No worries here about a code or tradition, just make the game watchable for fans. They have so many franchises worth over a billion bucks.
I don't know if 4 on 4 is a solution because there is so much space out there and a power play almost assures a goal. The NHL had the chance in the 1990s to expand the size of the rinks when so many new buildings were being constructed, but no, they had to keep everything the same. So now injuries are getting worse as players are bigger and better. So the joke on the NHL because the rinks shrunk because players grew. The NHL is a very reactive league.
I agree with you re: crosby's incident, no accident, but some of the incidents are
accidents, most are not, the NHL must figure out which is which, and what ever way
they do it, many do not agree.
there doesn't have to be a 'joke' on anybody. stuff happens, life goes on, athletes in 'all' sports get
better and better, which in hockey has made the game faster, better and the players are bigger.
An NHL player is lucky if he makes a good living playing in the NHL for ten years, many don't make it
that long, and many do. The risk of a career ending injury is always there, and many injurys along
the way.
On a different note, all of the money collected by the NHL from teams who have 'suspended' players,
goes to old retired hockey players, who are 'down and out' in life, going way back in time, not
recent players.
That is a good thing, as a long time ago, with no players association, the players were taken advantage
of by owners, paid too little, with owners making 'huge' profits, and as in anyone's life, some of
these players had a sad life later on, with no pension, so now the NHL reaches out to help, along
with the players association, so good on them for that.
I don't think the answer to head shots, is to make rinks bigger. The players will gradually adjust
to the change, as we all adjust to different changes in our lives.
I will never be critical of 'anyone' making a good living, all the more power to them.
They spent all of their childhoods working hard to make the NHL, only a small number of players
'do' make it, as is in most professional sports and entertainment, 'most' do not make the big
time, but many do get good educations from hockey scholarships which allows them to go on to
some sort of career if they wish.
I am not jealous of my neighbour if he/she makes big money, or no money, life is life, some make
it to a big pay cheque, some don't.
So be it.
I will never understand why many criticize a professional athlete making a good living. I don't
criticize anyone making a good living, 'WITHIN THE LAW', if you want to talk drug peddling and
praying on the weak to make millions, then i'm with you.
Yes, Don Cherry does a much better job when he's talking about hockey as the game has a few problems lately. Being in Whitehorse this weekend he had no time to talk about war or anything. Great.
I envy the filthy rich like anyone, but I want the Canucks to win the Stanley Cup asap. It's what every hockey fan and aspiring Cdn city wants. I think they have a very good chance this year.
It's not a ha-ha joke, it's a sign the NHL has not kept up with the times or controlled their environment. They may not have noticed that health and medical issues are front and centre these days, no one immune from these concerns. Pro sports only live in a different reality to a point, then things change and when organizations go WTF like they are now for the NHL it's not good.
I envy the filthy rich like anyone, but I want the Canucks to win the Stanley Cup asap. It's what every hockey fan and aspiring Cdn city wants. I think they have a very good chance this year.
It's not a ha-ha joke, it's a sign the NHL has not kept up with the times or controlled their environment. They may not have noticed that health and medical issues are front and centre these days, no one immune from these concerns. Pro sports only live in a different reality to a point, then things change and when organizations go WTF like they are now for the NHL it's not good.
A public employee (which Don Cherry is) expressing patriotic sentiments on state-television would be objectionable if not for the innocuous nature of the CBC and its quasi-editorial-independence from the government. What bothers me the most is Cherry's state-funded racism. I'm a free speech absolutist and believe that if you don't like what someone has to say don't listen. But in the case of Don Cherry, while I'm not compelled to listen to him I am still compelled to pay him to say it.
Yeah, I'm paying for Cherry directly, which I would not do if he had his own webpage. The CBC is publicly financed, which makes it different for him. Doesn't Cherry watch the news? Big man authoritarianism is looking very out these days. But Cherry can do it for five minutes a week discussing hockey.
What is Cherry saying that is racist, you may not agree with his statements about the troops, but that is not racist.
If you're going to call someone racist, you have to discuss it a little more. Calling someone racist has been a good way to shut down discussion for too long in Canada. So, whadda ya mean? Use quotes if you can in your examples.
Quoting Corduroy: "What bothers me the most is Cherry's state-funded racism." My question was directed to Corduroy, but since you replied to me. What was Corduroy chatting about?
So we all know Cherry doesn't like French Canadians or Europeans, but he doesn't have to. We don't have to like everyone. Cherry also got wired when Ovechkin did his dances when scoring. Cherry obviously never watches English soccer and the antics English soccer players do when they score. I noticed on CBC they showed Ronaldo doing antics, who is Portuguese.
Canadians have to get off their high horse that they love all people in the world. It is fake. It is not true. We like some people more than others. Cherry tells it like it is once in a while. We like English/British people more and he is just saying it, and the CBC is showing it.
Gotcha, he is Canadian first. (not a racist) I like the antics players do when they score also just having a little fun and maybe rubbing it in a little.
Chery doesn't like French Canadians or Europeans, that is what I would guess is what Corduroy is talking about when she says Cherry is racist. What I would say to that is he like a lot of people who want local business to get all contracts for govts say, rather than non-Canadians, which is what Maude Barlow and unions say. Unions and Barlow are not considered racist for being anti-free trade. They however don't focus on individuals, but corporations.
Cherry has stated that the media has a love-in with Europeans. Nothing wrong with saying that. Cherry was upset because he felt Kyle Wellwood got the bum's rush by the NHL before the Canucks picked him up, whereas Europeans got a better deal he felt. Cherry has a view of hockey and that it should be for Canadians and North Americans, most people don't agree, but he can say it since the message is similiar to Barlow and unions.