Whatever you might think of Crosby, that last goal says a lot. For a guy with a severe concussion history to lay an open ice hit like that to end up with the puck (that might’ve been luck) and quickly recover to shoot it down into the open net took some juice for sure.

quote:

---

Originally posted by chuckv97

Whatever you might think of Crosby, that last goal says a lot. For a guy with a severe concussion history to lay an open ice hit like that to end up with the puck (that might’ve been luck) and quickly recover to shoot it down into the open net took some juice for sure.

---

Whatever you think of Crosby...? What ELSE can one think of Crosby, other than that he's one of the greatest players - and arguably one of the best people - to ever lace them up? The only negative thing I can say about him is that he never saw fit to don the Spoked B.

And it's that time again.

Hmm,,, I appreciate the view, but methinks the eyes might be Ai generated,, & there's those pigeon-toes again! . ;-)
As for Crosby, there were times in the past that he was accused of whining,, also Mr. Grandstander , J. Roenick (sorry to pick on another NooInglandah) , used to diss Sid for his bland personality with media interviews.

quote:

---

Originally posted by chuckv97

Hmm,,, I appreciate the view, but methinks the eyes might be Ai generated,, & there's those pigeon-toes again! . ;-)
As for Crosby, there were times in the past that he was accused of whining,, also Mr. Grandstander , J. Roenick (sorry to pick on another NooInglandah) , used to diss Sid for his bland personality with media interviews.

---

I love a good colorful interview as much as the next guy. This is why Marchand is frequently so entertaining. But I don't hold Sid's bland personality against him. He pretty much proved it on the ice, meaning he really didn't have to prove it off the ice.

Bland personality in interviews????   Well, obviously!!!   

quote:

---

Originally posted by Owen

Bland personality in interviews????   Well, obviously!!!   

---

As someone who has worked for many years to train spokespeople, I can assure you that a measure of blandness in interviews is usually preferable.

And then every now and again, a John Tortorella shows up and re-shapes the universe.

.... preferable for the trainer or the audience?     

Are there any trainers that train the interviewee to answer the *^G%$Y&%n'  question?!?!?!?

^^^^^ nobody wants to give away trade secrets…. so obviously the default answer is “we’ll give it 110%”

quote:

---

Originally posted by Owen

.... preferable for the trainer or the audience?     

Are there any trainers that train the interviewee to answer the *^G%$Y&%n'  question?!?!?!?

---

Preferable for the organization employing the spokesperson.

And yes, there are techniques to answering the *^G%$Y&%n' question. If the spokesperson is talented enough - as a spokesperson. And if the spokesperson has enough clout in the organization.

Fair enough, but ^^ raises the question,  "Why do organizations send/provide untalented individuals to be interviewed?"   

As for clout. from the questions I see going unanswered, apparently our prime minister, premiers, ministers, deputy ministers, councilors, chiefs of police, heads of crown corporations, heads of unions, heads of hospital boards, etc., etc. by-and-large apparently don't have it.   

'Way back one of my brothers was employed as a pedologist (?) by our provincial agriculture department.  He mentioned one time that he had attended some sort of workshop on dealing with the media. Not that he would ever be in a position to use it, one of the techniques they were apparently taught was to simply sidestep the question by saying something akin to "Well, I can't talk about that, but had you asked me, ____(insert question on a topic or the twist that you want here) ___  and then proceed to "answer" your question instead of the one that was asked."    Works for me.  

.

More St. Catharines …..

Ken Dryden says that regardless of prior accomplishments, for a one game final the goaltenders go into the game "as equals."   

I call b.s.!!  I think he's babbling!!

Now, had he said that it's nigh impossible to accurately predict how things will pan out, I'd agree with him.*

*  how's that for  "spokesman-ese"  ... answer a question that wasn't asked??  

Edit:  I recall a conversation 'way back with one of the U of M Bisons about using the "second-string" goalie.  He replied, "It doesn't matter. If he wasn't good he wouldn't be on the team."

If you can remember the backup to P Roy when he got pulled after 9 goals you win a cigar. K Dryden and E Friedman should do a podcast … zzzzz

Methinks I'll not even guess ...  might not even get the right era.  

But, but, but, had you asked me to identify the other guy in the pic, I'd [probably] do better.  

quote:

---

Originally posted by Owen

Fair enough, but ^^ raises the question,  "Why do organizations send/provide untalented individuals to be interviewed?"   

 

---

It's generally the result of 1) naivete, 2) arrogance/hubris, or 3) really bad luck. Sometimes a combination.

A fair number of my clients decided it was time for media training only after getting the S#!+ scared out of them.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Owen

Methinks I'll not even guess ...  might not even get the right era.  

But, but, but, had you asked me to identify the other guy in the pic, I'd [probably] do better.  

---

Who else but that Toledo, Ohio-an Pat Jablonski ?

"

• Jablonski was a backup goalie for the Montreal Canadiens. In one game, Pat Jablonski replaced Patrick Roy after Roy allowed nine goals.Roy then told the team president that he had played his final game for the Canadiens. "

I just heard another sin-o’-nim for chirping ; “friendly banter”. How ‘bout them apples, eh?

.... and I suppose the next thing you'll tell me is that "friendly banter" will somehow upset an opponent or put him off his game????   I think "them apples" is more like road apples.  

Btw, what's the source of ^^ definition?

Edit: Yes it can be friendly banter .... until it's not [i.e. some sort of code??] and then the players can enforce it themselves .... in  a perfect world.  

source,,, the ink-stained scribes

That. Was. Some. Game.

Excellent game,, tight checking but nail-biting. Could’ve ended up as a winner either way. Lucky no penalty called for too many men on the ice by Canada. (always a fly in the ointment,,,it was an old-school tie)

quote:

---

Originally posted by chuckv97

Excellent game,, tight checking but nail-biting. Could’ve ended up as a winner either way. Lucky no penalty called for too many men on the ice by Canada. (always a fly in the ointment,,,it was an old-school tie)

---

Yeah, bit of luck there, but them's the breaks. And yes, they could play a full series and it would still come down to overtime in Game 7.

This has been a fascinating tournament for so many reasons. It's pretty well established that Boston isn't happy over what happened to McAvoy (were I to bet, he's done for the season, but it's not like anyone will say that) and the Jacobs are Bettman's primary power sources in the league. I'm sure that other team owners have surveyed the carnage and are muttering about whether this is really such a good idea.

OTOH, these are hockey players. The BEST hockey players, and they made no bones about it: best on best, winner takes it, everything gets left of in the ice. You can't stop that kind of thing, short of outright prohibiting this type of competition. And the players WANT IT.

I think when all is said and done this tournament has done more for the game, and awakening interest in it, than any other event in the past generation. Hat's off to the league, and the players, and the fans (old and new).

Yes, Skip. I’m thinking if it grows interest in the game and attracts new fans, owners will benefit, regardless of injuries to key players. Sid wasn't 100%, neither was Doughty and probably a few on the USA team; they likely risk further injury but so be it. I suppose owners fixate on Cup wins. 

quote:

---

Originally posted by chuckv97

Yes, Skip. I’m thinking if it grows interest in the game and attracts new fans, owners will benefit, regardless of injuries to key players. Sid wasn't 100%, neither was Doughty and probably a few on the USA team; they likely risk further injury but so be it. I suppose owners fixate on Cup wins. 

---

Of course they do. One-off tournaments like this are brilliant for spreading the game, but don't do doodly when it comes to selling 15,000 season tickets each year.