"Sens Fight Club Big Hit With Fans"

[paint huffer]

Originally Posted by BROKEN*ORBITAL

Funny thing is that Chris Neil used to get ripped in the Ottawa media (early mid 000's) for doing nothing when the team was down. He gets into a scrap and tries to fire up the fans, and gets ragged on for that now too.

The media in Ottawa is probably more ridiculous than media outlets in most other cities worldwide. And believe it or not, the sports writers are often the least of the offenders. It's pretty much impossible for anyone to ever do anything properly in this city. Give money to an environmental cause and you'll get slammed for not giving money to the homeless. Give money to the homeless and you'll get slammed for not giving money to an environmental cause. One just can't win.

[fightingfan]

Originally Posted by Jack Schitt

Okay.... Let's go. I'll hit you in the nuts first.

that would only make me even more mad and i would prolly want to beat your face in even more. if anything looch gave neil an even bigger reason to want to win the fight..... BUT he didnt looch won

[RetardedChimp]

Originally Posted by fightingfan

that would only make me even more mad and i would prolly want to beat your face in even more. if anything looch gave neil an even bigger reason to want to win the fight..... BUT he didnt looch won

Lucic knew he could have ended Neil's career in that fight, so he wanted to give Neil an edge by spearing him in the nuts right before he grabbed on and started throwing...That Lucic, what a guy.

[fightingfan]

Originally Posted by RetardedChimp

Lucic knew he could have ended Neil's career in that fight, so he wanted to give Neil an edge by spearing him in the nuts right before he grabbed on and started throwing...That Lucic, what a guy.

i know you hate lucic and i dont like him that much either but in this fight he clearly beat neil fairly

[RetardedChimp]

Originally Posted by fightingfan

i know you hate lucic and i dont like him that much either but in this fight he clearly beat neil fairly

I don't HATE Lucic, he's highly overrated by certain people on here. But that has nothing to do with your logic that Lucic spearing Neil before the fight somehow helped Neil. I don't really care about the spear that much, but for you to act like it was beneficial to Neil is retarded.

Either way, I don't count superficial damage like cuts in fights if it doesn't effect anything, that fight was an edge for Lucic. Unfortunately for Lucic (or more likely his fans) it was tainted.

[fightingfan]

Originally Posted by RetardedChimp

I don't HATE Lucic, he's highly overrated by certain people on here. But that has nothing to do with your logic that Lucic spearing Neil before the fight somehow helped Neil. I don't really care about the spear that much, but for you to act like it was beneficial to Neil is retarded.

Either way, I don't count superficial damage like cuts in fights if it doesn't effect anything, that fight was an edge for Lucic. Unfortunately for Lucic (or more likely his fans) it was tainted.

i said IF anything, i didnt say it did help out neil but it didnt effect him in a negative way at all. i also dont think blood determines the outcome BUT when you are leaking that badly, damage is being done to your face. this wasnt some small cut he was split open. lucic connected alot of times in that fight it was a clear win

[RetardedChimp]

Originally Posted by fightingfan

i said IF anything, i didnt say it did help out neil but it didnt effect him in a negative way at all. i also dont think blood determines the outcome BUT when you are leaking that badly, damage is being done to your face. this wasnt some small cut he was split open. lucic connected alot of times in that fight it was a clear win

It looked to stun Neil, giving Lucic a chance to use his reach to get good positioning from the start, where he did the damage. You are crazy if you think it was a positive thing for Neil that he just got rocked in his ball bag.

The fight was Lucic early Neil late. If a fighter gets cut in the beginning of the fight it's going to bleed the whole fight.

Blood is blood, a little or a lot, it didn't effect Neil or the fight one bit, so I don't factor it into the fight outcome. Sure it looks good for Lucic and bad for Neil, but that is all it did. If Neil would have turtled, or stopped fighting after he got cut open then I would change my opinion.

[Jack Schitt]

Originally Posted by fightingfan

that would only make me even more mad and i would prolly want to beat your face in even more. if anything looch gave neil an even bigger reason to want to win the fight..... BUT he didnt looch won

That is fukkin stupid. There is a physical reaction that most of us whose balls have actually dropped experience when hit in the nuts. Sure it may piss you off, but it takes some time to recover. I never said that Lucic didn't win ... he just started off cheaply.

[Jack Schitt]

Originally Posted by paint huffer

Exactly. Who cares if he started the fight by a little spear to the junk? It didn't cause a serious injury, so let's get over it. Where I think differently is that I do think the spear did have an impact on the outcome of the fight, but again, who cares?! It's hockey, not every fight is going to start out in a perfectly fair manner. I wouldn't be surprised if next time Neil gets the jump in some way, shape, or form. It happens.

I don't "care" if he smashes Neils nuts flat with an anvil... What bothers me is twofold: The refusal of certain posters to acknowlege that getting hit in the nuts gives an unfair advantage to the hitter, and the crowing about what a "tune-up" it was which was due in large part to said nut-smack.

I'm aware that every fight isn't going to start out in a "perfectly fair manner", whateverthefuk that is supposed to mean, but IMO getting the jump on a guy by dropping them first is one thing, and hitting someone in the nuts and THEN getting the jumpis a different case altogether, and frankly is cheap BS.

[paint huffer]

Originally Posted by Jack Schitt

I don't "care" if he smashes Neils nuts flat with an anvil... What bothers me is twofold: The refusal of certain posters to acknowlege that getting hit in the nuts gives an unfair advantage to the hitter, and the crowing about what a "tune-up" it was which was due in large part to said nut-smack.

I'm aware that every fight isn't going to start out in a "perfectly fair manner", whateverthefuk that is supposed to mean, but IMO getting the jump on a guy by dropping them first is one thing, and hitting someone in the nuts and THEN getting the jumpis a different case altogether, and frankly is cheap BS.

I wasn't trying to single you out- everyone needs to get over this. Both pro-Lucic, anti-Lucic as well as pro-Neil and anti-Neil. But what is most intriguing about your post is that you state:

Originally Posted by Jack Schitt

What bothers me is twofold: The refusal of certain posters to acknowlege that getting hit in the nuts gives an unfair advantage to the hitter, and the crowing about what a "tune-up" it was which was due in large part to said nut-smack.

I just don't know why you are bothered so much, as you put it. Even if Neil had knocked Lucic out, there would still be some people who would find a way to glorify Lucic in relation to that particular fight. Every fighter has their following of fans whom, no matter what, will never be capable of looking at things 100% objectively. It happens, and no matter how much you do you'll never change that. If you debate with them for the sake of the debate/argument, that's all fine and dandy. But to let it actually bother you, well then I can tell you you're fighting a losing battle.

[Jack Schitt]

Originally Posted by paint huffer

I just don't know why you are bothered so much, as you put it. Even if Neil had knocked Lucic out, there would still be some people who would find a way to glorify Lucic in relation to that particular fight. Every fighter has their following of fans whom, no matter what, will never be capable of looking at things 100% objectively. It happens, and no matter how much you do you'll never change that. If you debate with them for the sake of the debate/argument, that's all fine and dandy. But to let it actually bother you, well then I can tell you you're fighting a losing battle.

It's a figure of speech. That's like me questioning why you were "intrigued" by my post, and suggesting that maybe you are taking it too seriously. But thanks for the advice, Doctor ....and why does "everyone need to get over this"? Is this not a site where hockeyfight fans gather to debate, commiserate and interact?

My position is really very simple. There is no excuse for spearing a guy in the nads just prior to fighting him. It's cheap, no if's and's or but's and most definitely had/would have bearing on the outcome.

[HordiBrusk29]

Originally Posted by Jack Schitt

Yes, Neil lost the fight after he was speared in the nuts.

Being "speared in the nuts" as you like to call it wasn't the reason Neil lost the fight. My point is if Lucic got "tapped" in the jewels before fighting someone like Neil and won the fight and someone tried to used that as an argument as to why Lucic lost you and make others would laugh at that. You wouldn't even consider using that as an argument to label the fight as "unfair".

There are plenty of examples of fights over the years where you could make an argument someone had an unfair advantage. The fact is this whole incident is only brought up and continuously discussed because of a specific player involved and the constant unnecessary bashing he receives around here.

Originally Posted by Jack Schitt

You claim "both sides are equally annoying", yet you only, for lack of a better term, "go after" the Lucic "haters". I wonder why......

News flash, I've ripped both sides on numerous occasions. Funny how you only seem to notice one side of that. Both Lucic homers and Lucic bashers are equally annoying. I've been a Lucic fan a lot longer than most current Lucic homers have even known he existed. So believe me it isn't like I have some personal preference. I just wish people shut up and enjoy watching him play. The league could use more guys like him.

[Jack Schitt]

Originally Posted by HordiBrusk29

Being "speared in the nuts" as you like to call it wasn't the reason Neil lost the fight.

It's stuff like this that baffles me. Are you saying he didn't get hit in the nuts? Are you saying that a nut shot couldn't affect the outcome of a fight?

My point is if Lucic got "tapped" in the jewels before fighting someone like Neil and won the fight and someone tried to used that as an argument as to why Lucic lost you and make others would laugh at that. You wouldn't even consider using that as an argument to label the fight as "unfair".

First, that whole paragraph requires a whole lot of conjecture on your part, and you are wrong. Don't try to paint me as some huge Lucic hater, because there are plenty of times I have said positive things about him, and said that he is a tough SOB. I'm more of a Lucic realist. I'm not dealing with "if's" and conjecture ... I'm looking at the FACT that Lucic speared, "tapped" caressed.... whatever term you want to use - the sack of Neil directly before the fight. To say that a nut shot would not affect the way someone would fight is ridiculous.

There are plenty of examples of fights over the years where you could make an argument someone had an unfair advantage. The fact is this whole incident is only brought up and continuously discussed because of a specific player involved and the constant unnecessary bashing he receives around here.

Holy schitt. Stop with the conspiracy theories. The reason this incident was brought up is because this thread is about the "Sens fight club", of which Neil is a "member". Someone chimed in about the great Looch "tuning up" Neil. The constant unnecessary (in your opinon) bashing is overshadowed only by the constant homeristic man-love (in my opinion) that he recieves. The bottom line is that hitting a guy in the nuts then punching him in the face is not honorable or worthy of some grand praise. If you are willing to look past it because of who was involved I'm not surprised. That is your opinion and you are entitled to it.

News flash, I've ripped both sides on numerous occasions. Funny how you only seem to notice one side of that.

Honestly, I don't follow your posting habits that closely. I only know that you have jumped on me several times, yet your disdain for the other side of the coin is limited to saying they are generally "annoying".




.

I just wish people shut up and enjoy watching him play. The league could use more guys like him.

By "shut up" you mean "never criticize"?

[paint huffer]

Originally Posted by Jack Schitt

It's a figure of speech. That's like me questioning why you were "intrigued" by my post, and suggesting that maybe you are taking it too seriously. But thanks for the advice, Doctor ....and why does "everyone need to get over this"? Is this not a site where hockeyfight fans gather to debate, commiserate and interact?

Saying you are bothered is figure of speech? I guess it can be, but usually it means one is bothered...but if that's not what you meant, fine. A better figure of speech may have been "what I find ridiculous, what's crazy, etc, etc" as then there's zero room for ambiguity. Saying "I'm bothered" usually implies one is bothered -that's where I formed my impression. But again, if it was meant differently, fantastic. And I'm not here to be the semantic police, far from it, I just want you to see where I was coming from as you seemed a tad disconcerted with my interpretation.

If you do want to know why I used the term "intrigued" it's because, to be perfectly frank, I was intrigued. Hence my usage of the word. I found it intriguing that someone would be so bothered by something being posted on a message board. But now that we know you didn't mean you were bothered, that's all cleared up.

As for why everyone needs to get over this, it's because it's going nowhere fast. It's turned into a circular argument, nobody has made any new points in a few weeks, and not a single person has changed their opinion. It's essentially a glorified version of an argument between four year olds

"You're stuipd"
"No"
"Yes"
"No"
"Yes"

In perpetuity.

You're a smart guy and you know that, though. And like I originally said:

Originally Posted by paint huffer

If you debate with them for the sake of the debate/argument, that's all fine and dandy.

So yeah, in my opinion this discussion is nothing but beating a dead horse and it's going nowhere. But, if you aren't bothered and you're enjoying the debate, then far be it for me to stop you. That's why I posted the above line in the first place. You probably just glanced over it, no worries.

Originally Posted by Jack Schitt

My position is really very simple. There is no excuse for spearing a guy in the nads just prior to fighting him. It's cheap, no if's and's or but's and most definitely had/would have bearing on the outcome.

And we're in 100% agreement on this. But I know that I won't change anyone's opinion here who thinks otherwise. I believe you are right in terms of your overall assessment. But I don't think this crusade is worth fighting. If you do, so be it.

[Jack Schitt]

Originally Posted by paint huffer

Saying you are bothered is figure of speech? I guess it can be, but usually it means one is bothered...but if that's not what you meant, fine.

Okay, I'll play that game Webster ... the definition of bothered that best fit my mood is :
b. To make confused or perplexed; puzzle

If you do want to know why I used the term "intrigued" it's because, to be perfectly frank, I was intrigued. Hence my usage of the word. I found it intriguing that someone would be so bothered by something being posted on a message board. But now that we know you didn't mean you were bothered, that's all cleared up.

You were intrigued that someone would be confused or puzzled?

As for why everyone needs to get over this, it's because it's going nowhere fast. It's turned into a circular argument, nobody has made any new points in a few weeks, and not a single person has changed their opinion. It's essentially a glorified version of an argument between four year olds

"You're stuipd"
"No"
"Yes"
"No"
"Yes"

In perpetuity.

Then feel free not to enter the fray. Apparently the lure is too great to resist?
It's like the guys who post in a thread complaining that a thread is still going...


I'd also like to point out that I'm not starting a pissing contest. I'm stating my opinion and reasons why I come to my conclusion. That is different from people on the other side of the coin who just state that I'm "hater", or IF this or IF that......

So yeah, in my opinion this discussion is nothing but beating a dead horse and it's going nowhere. But, if you aren't bothered and you're enjoying the debate, then far be it for me to stop you. That's why I posted the above line in the first place. You probably just glanced over it, no worries.

Then why bother with the whole dissertation if the bottom line is "far be it from me to stop you?"

And we're in 100% agreement on this. But I know that I won't change anyone's opinion here who thinks otherwise. I believe you are right in terms of your overall assessment. But I don't think this crusade is worth fighting. If you do, so be it.

Thank you. I will carry the load for both of us.