Claude Lemieux just turtled AGAIN

[Hank 0]

Again, I AGREED with the antagonist. I hate Lemieux becuase he was DIRTY. Yes, I totally remember Cheli being a complete irritant. No, I don't remember him trying to take out our players. And no, it wasn't just that one hit with Lemieux. Certainly without that one extreme one he did to Draper my hatred of him wouldn't be as high, but it seemed the guy was always after guys who were in vulnerable positions. That they weren't injured doesn't make it not dirty. I know people bring up Cheli, but I'm not getting the connection that I need to be OK with Lemieux in some way because of Cheli. And while some people are stuck on the dirty word with Cheli, I don't remember that. I remember him going after the play, jawing and generally being an ass. I don't remember cheap shots. Pushing and shoving after plays are over and irritating your opponents is part of hockey, and isn't going to injure them.

As for people aren't online like they are with people in real life, congratulations on your firm grasp of the obvious. In fact that's a nice thing about the Internet. You guys chose to defend the evil one and I like to argue. So I did. Wow, I wouldn't do that if I met you in a cafe, you're onto something there. Could catch on when people realize they can do that, shh. Maybe some people would even like that. But since you chose to defend the most reviled enemy of the Wings and admit you do not "support" us, I still don't feel sorry for you no matter how much you want to whine about it.

Oy vay, you're all over the map. When did I ask for sympathy?

And didn't you just say that you would talk to someone in person exactly how you are here? And now you're going back on that?

I understand that perception's are hard to pick up on since we're typing and not talking face-to-face. All the more reason for what I've said how it's not necessary to follow up any counter arguments with unwarrented insults.

[Guest micah]

Brian Propp.

I came back to post this. Chris chelios was every bit as dirty as Claude Lemieux was, maybe more so.

The Steve Yzerman garbage - Chelios was into cheapshotting our best player and then cowing like a ***** when our heavies came near him - at least Claude Lemieux fought Mac when he was challenged straight-up, When Probert went after Chelios Cheli grabbed Probie's sleeves and shat himself. Remember how famous Chelios was for stickwork, slashing at the ankles of men like Tim Hunter - men he didn't have the sack to man-up and fight? Remember how just last year Chelios admitted to BITING Thomas Sandstrum in a scrap? Remeber him being suspended for his third-man-in act?

If you hate cheapshot artists, you hate Chelios and Lemieux.

If you hate cowards, you hate Chelios, Maltby and occasionally Lemieux.

If you hate anyone who makes our team look like a bunch of nancies by taking on our resident heavyweight and fighting him to a draw, proving to all the world that he wasn't a coward or a weakling, then you might just hate Claude Lemieux.

I calls them as I see them. I do love the Red wings. I do dislike Claude Lemieux - but I dislike him for rational rather than emotional reasons. I didlike him because he was cheap and didn't fight as much as he should have. I dislike chelios because he was cheap and even less willing to fight tough guys than Lemieux was. I agknowledge that both were great players in this league. I do not like Chelios or Maltby or Lemieux - but if I were forced to answer "who was the toughest and ballsiest out of those three jerkwads?", I would have to answer Lemieux.

[GMRwings1983 8,804]

Lilja's never destroyed anyone in his career, he'd be able to tie up his arms and probably just tackle him to the ice. Downey is nowhere to be found.

I'm not trying to be a dick but I'm just being rational. Claude Lemieux is currently playing in the NHL and let's just say for fun (not really fun) that something did happen in a game where Lemieux mangled someone's face again. Nothing would happen to him, and you're kidding yourself if you think otherwise.

Say that to Sheldon Souray's face right after Lilja dropped him on his fat ass.

Or did he tie him up to?

There's also that Patrick Sharp fellow.

Why does everyone forget or refuse to acknowledge the fact that Drake played in pretty much every game last year and Downey played in a majority of the regular reason? It's always stat sheets to people on these boards. No one ever wants to give credit to the grinders and role players that go out with their heart on their sleeve and will do anything to help the team win. It's always what's on the score sheet.

Because people on this forum are stupid enough to think that Drake, Downey and McCarty had almost nothing to do with this team's emerging grit over the course of the season and the playoffs.

That's what happens when the team is last in fighing majors every year. You'd think that winning the Cup would have taught people a lesson after all those playoff disappointments in previous years.

[NomadFromKazoo 42]

Doubtful he has any idea who Brian Propp is.

I'm a little sick talking to you now that you and Hank's hands are so deep in each other's pants, but I didn't say Lemieux was dirty just because someone got injured and his team was mad at them. I hate the Canadians and the Flyers and it was like 20 years ago. I'd have to see the hit to say it was "dirty," particularly to the level of a Lemieux. I don't remember him hitting Propp into the boards from behind, wasn't it open ice? So I guess rather than saying I do or don't remember, I have to say I sort of remember but just the name doesn't make me say Cheli is Lemieux or get why it's a defense of Lemieux if it is.

Anyway, it's been fun, gotta do some other stuff. Feel free to blast me with some more insults and I'll get to them later!

[NomadFromKazoo 42]

Why does everyone forget or refuse to acknowledge the fact that Drake played in pretty much every game last year and Downey played in a majority of the regular reason? It's always stat sheets to people on these boards. No one ever wants to give credit to the grinders and role players that go out with their heart on their sleeve and will do anything to help the team win. It's always what's on the score sheet.

You're right, Drake was a loss. I'd argue Stuart for the whole season and Hossa are a net addition and I don't think Drake alone takes us from pansies to gritty and justify a "fan" saying he can't "support" us because of it, but I specifically said we lost no one important and you're totally right that was wrong, Drake was a loss.

Edited February 18, 2009 by NomadFromKazoo

[Hank 0]

Umm...show me where I said that. If you're so "rational" then why do you need to completely fabricate the points you're arguing? Do you mean that once you fabricated a point your response to it is completely "rational?"

http://www.letsgowings.com/forums/index.ph...t&p=1549740

Kaz: Actually the reference to 12 was that anyone older should remember Claude Lemieux, it wasn't a reference to "comprehension." As for your not liking being insulted, again, whatever any other player did, no one has been as dirty with the Wings as the guy you're defending. And you're doing it on a Wing's fan site. Do the math, don't defend our most bitter enemies and then whine you get some grief. As for me, I like to argue and I HATE Claude Lemieux. If you were saying it about say Joe Thornton and I hated him because he drove over my dog I could totally see you saying WTF!?! But you choose to defend our most bitter enemy of all and whine? Good luck with that.

To me, that means we're not allowed to argue any points against the Wings or their enemies without being insulted.

I'm not sure where it was determined that you can't argue points without adding insults but you see to be adamant that the two go hand-in-hand.

That's why nobody likes you and everyone you've ever met thinks you're an *******. Sorry if my humor isn't coming through with this post. Darn this internet and the anonymity it provides!

[DuckSoup13 0]

I just watched NHL On the Fly at lunch and they made no mention of this turtling.

[Guest Shoreline]

Why does everyone forget or refuse to acknowledge the fact that Drake played in pretty much every game last year and Downey played in a majority of the regular reason? It's always stat sheets to people on these boards. No one ever wants to give credit to the grinders and role players that go out with their heart on their sleeve and will do anything to help the team win. It's always what's on the score sheet.

Agreed 100%. There's really little to no credence to give to arguments so focused on statistics when the game is won on the ice, with the roleplayers included -- not a game of D&D.

[Hank 0]

Anyway, it's been fun, gotta do some other stuff. Feel free to blast me with some more insults and I'll get to them later!

Fine, I will. You smell.

[esteef 2,679]

Why does everyone forget or refuse to acknowledge the fact that Drake played in pretty much every game last year and Downey played in a majority of the regular reason? It's always stat sheets to people on these boards. No one ever wants to give credit to the grinders and role players that go out with their heart on their sleeve and will do anything to help the team win. It's always what's on the score sheet.

Because to them, fighting is an archaic part of the sport that shouldn't even be allowed anymore because it only serves the stupid WWF/UFC fan who wants to see punches in the face and nothing more. It couldn't possibly build team toughness, create momentum, intimidate other players/teams, etc. Those things don't have stats.

esteef

[edicius 3,269]

OH MY GOD.

What the f***? I must be in some kind of Twilight Zone LGW forum .... because... I think... I think I just read an ENTIRE THREAD that is mostly praising CLAUDE ******* LEMIEUX and talking s*** about THE DETROIT RED WINGS.

I need a ******* drink.

Dino Ciccarelli can't believe this f***in' thread.

[skacore 2]

I'm a little sick talking to you now that you and Hank's hands are so deep in each other's pants, but I didn't say Lemieux was dirty just because someone got injured and his team was mad at them. I hate the Canadians and the Flyers and it was like 20 years ago. I'd have to see the hit to say it was "dirty," particularly to the level of a Lemieux. I don't remember him hitting Propp into the boards from behind, wasn't it open ice? So I guess rather than saying I do or don't remember, I have to say I sort of remember but just the name doesn't make me say Cheli is Lemieux or get why it's a defense of Lemieux if it is.

Anyway, it's been fun, gotta do some other stuff. Feel free to blast me with some more insults and I'll get to them later!

Take care, and better luck next time!

[Ms_Hockey 0]

He's old. He can't readily partake in every fight that's presented to him. Big whoop.

And really, who on our team goes out and fights?

[Electrophile 3,554]

I don't care how much talent he may have had/currently has, I don't care how many Cups/awards he's won. I don't even care how good he used to fight or still fights or wants to fight.

I hate the asshat. End of.

Edited February 18, 2009 by Electrophile

[Electrophile 3,554]

OH MY GOD.

What the f***? I must be in some kind of Twilight Zone LGW forum .... because... I think... I think I just read an ENTIRE THREAD that is mostly praising CLAUDE ******* LEMIEUX and talking s*** about THE DETROIT RED WINGS.

I need a ******* drink.

I feel this.

[Ms_Hockey 0]

I don't care how much talent he may have had/currently has, I don't care how many Cups/awards he's won. I don't even care how good he used to fight or still fights or wants to fight.

I hate the asshat. End of.

Agreed 100%.

[T.Low 1,011]

CL is at the top of my Hate list, yes. But that was not a turtle.

Can't believe I waded thru 5 pages to just say that.

[DyingAlive 27]

It wasn't as bad as a turtle, but regardless, Claude is a joke. Why the Sharks took a chance on him I have no idea.

[Guest Shoreline]

It wasn't as bad as a turtle, but regardless, Claude is a joke. Why the Sharks took a chance on him I have no idea.

From the looks of it, to torture Jeremy Roenick.

Edited February 18, 2009 by Shoreline

[NomadFromKazoo 42]

To me, that means we're not allowed to argue any points against the Wings or their enemies without being insulted.

I'm not sure where it was determined that you can't argue points without adding insults but you see to be adamant that the two go hand-in-hand.

That's why nobody likes you and everyone you've ever met thinks you're an *******. Sorry if my humor isn't coming through with this post. Darn this internet and the anonymity it provides!

I was just messing with you. Just a suggestion, if you're going to be a thin skinned whiner, don't post messages on a message board at all much less posting contentious ones like you're doing, defending Lemieux and criticizing the Wings as pansies and saying you don't "support" them? Your choice, just a suggestion. Frankly when I saw that I thought you were in this for some fun. I stand corrected, you were serious and you're not going to stop whining. So, I'll stop playing and just examine your logic. But I'm going to last a lot longer posting on the Internet then you are if this bothers you so much.

When I said, "don't defend our most bitter enemies and then whine you get some grief" you hear "If you can't be 100% positive to all things Red Wing then don't bother coming to LGW" and when questioned where I said that you provide that quote and explain "to me, that means we're not allowed to argue any points against the Wings or their enemies without being insulted."

You're defending our bitterest enemy is according to you that you have to be "100% positive?" That's what you hear? I guess it is since you followed it up with "TO ME, that means we're not allowed to argue any points against the Wings..." Wow, if you can't defend our bitterest enemy, you can't say ANYTHING. That's your "rational" logic?

And let's talk consequence. I said if you do it, you're going to get some "grief." To your rational mind that means "don't bother coming to LGW." You'll get grief means you can't come here. That's your "rational" comprehension of the statement? Those are the only choices? And you're self declared "rational?" Thanks for clarifying that. And I have another one to follow...

Edited February 18, 2009 by NomadFromKazoo

[NomadFromKazoo 42]

And didn't you just say that you would talk to someone in person exactly how you are here? And now you're going back on that?

Here's the second one I promised. Here'sthe quote you're referring to:

Kaz: "Actually I would say it in real life, but you'd take it more humorously as the people who know me do. Of course you don't get that from a few messages on a message board."

Look at what I said and your flagrant misquote. I said I would say "it" in real life, a reference to a specific statement. You generalize that to that I "would talk to someone in person exactly how you are here." This is such a weak logical fallacy leaving you far short of your "rational" self description.

In addition to defending our bitterest enemy and saying you do not "support" the Wings because we're a bunch of pansies, you must misquote and perform flagrantly fallacious logic. It's no wonder you were so offended that I insulted you, it was WAY too close to home, far closer then originally intended when I thought your inflammatory statements were just a call for some spirited jousting.

Edited February 18, 2009 by NomadFromKazoo

[skacore 2]

Here's the second one I promised. Here'sthe quote you're referring to:

Kaz: "Actually I would say it in real life, but you'd take it more humorously as the people who know me do. Of course you don't get that from a few messages on a message board."

Look at what I said and your flagrant misquote. I said I would say "it" in real life, a reference to a specific statement. You generalize that to that I "would talk to someone in person exactly how you are here." This is such a weak logical fallacy leaving you far short of your "rational" self description.

In addition to defending our bitterest enemy and saying you do not "support" the Wings because we're a bunch of pansies, you must misquote and perform flagrantly fallacious logic. It's no wonder you were so offended that I insulted you, it was WAY too close to home, far closer then originally intended when I thought your inflammatory statements were just a call for some spirited jousting.

Oh my god, are you okay?

[uk_redwing 495]

Lol. Red Wings fans laughing at someone for getting in a fight. Oh the irony.

[mariah 0]

I don't care how much talent he may have had/currently has, I don't care how many Cups/awards he's won. I don't even care how good he used to fight or still fights or wants to fight.

I hate the asshat. End of.

I've never heard anyone say it better.

[Electrophile 3,554]

Lol. Red Wings fans laughing at someone for getting in a fight. Oh the irony.

No, we're laughing at Claude Lemieux for getting into a fight and turtling (depending on your definition of the word). In order for us to just be laughing at a person, the person we're laughing at must qualify for person status and Claude is quite clearly a vegetable.