Canucks & Beyond
Next entry: Dodging Bullets
Previous entry: Time to Panic?
Canucks Fan Survival Guide
by Alanah McGinley on 02/18/08 at 06:23 AM ET
Comments (16)
There was this memorably-dumbfounded look on Zach Stortini’s face at one point on Saturday night, long before his Oilers succumbed to the Vancouver Canucks. It was late in the first period, and he had just chopped a slash on some random Vancouverite in his path.
As the ref stopped play to indicate Stortini’s upcoming 2-minute detention, he looked around with the bewildered air of a 14 year old kid having just been busted for reading dad’s Playboy collection… while knowing that it was only minutes earlier that he’d been randomly setting houses on fire all over the neighborhood. It was as if to say, “Huh?? You’re seriously busting me for THIS?”
He had a point. Stortini went through that first period like a serial killer building a criminal resume. Finally nailing him for that slash was something like dropping Al Capone for tax evasion—and not nearly as rewarding as just pistol whipping him would’ve been.
Yet despite such obstacles, the Canucks ultimately prevailed and so the City of Vancouver breathed a sigh of relief at being in a playoff position again. And predictably, like sports-fan-whiplash, this week is going to produce a lineup of fans calling Vancouver sports talk radio sharing their plans for playoff parties (and worse, all those Canucks.com forum posters planning… well… whatever it is you plan when you’re a happy 7th grader). Etc.
But the truth is that it’s all just more over-reaction.
The highs are too high and the lows are too low in this town. Despair to euphoria in an instant. And keeping sane in a hockey town without losing one’s marbles is a tough road. So the question becomes: How does one cope with being a fan of a team determined to make you into an alcoholic?
Well, after years of practice at becoming the epitome of perfectly-measured hockey sanity myself, I thought I’d share some much-sought-after personal wisdom.
Here is the first part (of what might possibly become a 300-part series one day) on how to survive as a Canucks fan:
Filed in: dumb stuff, vancouver canucks | Canucks and Beyond | Permalink
Tags: canucks+fan+survival+guide, edmonton+oilers, impending+alcoholism, vancouver+canucks, zach+stortini,
Comments
Why are they friends? or why do they wear Hasek jerseys? You think there could be any reasonable explanation for that second one, regardless?
As for the tag, point taken. It shall be amended promptly.
Posted by Alanah McGinley from British Columbia on 02/18/08 at 01:19 PM ET
This here is some funny *$#&!
Stortini seemed to get what was coming to him. He plays a hard game.
The guy that got me was that Smid character. You watch the replays and all his hits were on the edge of the camera frame. (IE away from the puck)
The other thing I noticed during the game is that they kept showing Oilers fans in the crowd. Every one they showed was well, very, LARGE.
With anyone who can’t make it in BC moving to Alberta I am guessing these folks were back in BC visiting family or friends that could?
Great game, the Oilers looked good.
Posted by Laker from dapuddle on 02/18/08 at 01:32 PM ET
it was a good game. Stortini did his job I guess, if you count being an ugly mo-fo as a job.
I live in calgary, as an avid ‘Nucks fan of course, and this game had more rivalry in it than the so-called battle of alberta. Last flamers/oilers game had only 4 fights in the first 8 mins. Nothing compared to the 50-some-odd penalty minutes given out in the first 8 of the van game. That’s one more win for us over the flames. =)
Posted by LOUiE on 02/18/08 at 03:28 PM ET
Call me a child of 80’s hockey...but what the Canucks and Oilers played the other day was anything but hockey. There is one thing about being tough and dishing out some hits...there is quite another thing about gooning it up to ‘rally’ the team. If you have to rely on that...you may as well be the Charlestown Chiefs.
Obviously, the Canucks don’t have enough scoring punch, so Viggy has to rely on this instead.
Some say this game was a turning point in the season...I’d say it was, but not for the reasons most people think. I think the Canucks have shown their hand...they have shown this is all they got.
Posted by GZ Expat from Chiner on 02/18/08 at 06:38 PM ET
As for the tag, point taken. It shall be amended promptly.
Thanks. My “Alanah’s impending alcoholism” RSS feed missed this one.
Posted by Greg from Atlanta on 02/18/08 at 08:05 PM ET
GZ Expat that is a very strange accusation. The Canucks were winning, why would they provoke fights?
It was the Oilers who showed frustration at the end when Burrows scored and he was brutally slashed well after scoring, (Sportsnet Analysts were suggesting suspension on that one) THEN he was body checked after that by another Edmonton player.
This gooning of Burrows is what started the fighting.
Posted by Laker from dapuddle on 02/18/08 at 08:11 PM ET
It takes two dance partners...and the Canucks were willing participants (with the exception of a few players).
Burrows was nailed at the end with a cheap check...but I think you missed the completely wild handling of the stick by Burrows in which he slashed Staios...completely uncalled for. Thinking back a couple games ago in which Ryan Shannon took it in the back of the head by Khabibulin after his spin-o-rama goal...Shannon just pumped his fists and screamed. As if to say...’Look at the scoreboard, moron.’
Again, I am all for hard hitting action...standing up for your teammates, etc., but what happened the other night was just silly. From the opening face-off, you could see both teams were jabbering and looking for something to happen. Pre-meditated goonery.
Posted by GZ Expat from Chiner on 02/18/08 at 08:59 PM ET
Staois bodychecked him a good 3-5 seconds AFTER he scored????????????????????????????????????????????????????? HELLO????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????
Anybody home?
Burrows got a match penalty for his actions. I don’t condone what he did. Absolutely not. My POINT WAS, you were suggesting the Canucks had ‘shown their hand’ suggesting they gooned it up which is hardly the case. Burrow’s was heavily slashed in the upper body well after the goal, then bodychecked by staois. You don’t think he is going to react? That is just BS. Again, reacting with the stick was not the right thing to do, but at least his was a ONE HANDED slash to the back of the calves of Staois.
I don’t think too many players are like “Hey we are up by two goals let’s start some fights!” Say that out loud to yourself. That’s just comical.
On the ensuing draw after the goal, Edmonton put there players out first as per the rules, they put muscle out so the Canucks put what little muscle they have, out. More fights ensued. Big woop.
The Canucks proved they CAN play that kind of game, but they certainly didn’t provoke it.
Posted by Laker from Dapuddle on 02/18/08 at 09:28 PM ET
Just my opinion, but I don’t think the Canucks provoked the final incident. That struck me as simply Oiler frustration out the whazoo. However, much of the rest of the game I thought was mutual willingness.
And Burrows swing of the stick at the end could’ve easily got him reviewed. It just didn’t. Given the results of the NHL’s Staios review today, Burrows wouldn’t have been suspended anyway.
There were plenty of bad behaviors by the Canucks in that game, no doubt about it. But I also think Edmonton goes looking for it to some extent when they play Vancouver. And frankly, I’m just pleased overall that Vancouver doesn’t back down from it. (Yes, they’re “willing participants”, Expat, but I’d be far more disappointed if they let themselves get rolled over. But they stand up to it and for each other.)
If I had to pick out the worst behavior by Canucks that night, it wasn’t the fighting but instead a couple of hits from behind thrown by Cooke and Burrows against Oilers d-men into the boards. Neither hit was penalized and both concerned me far more than any goonery on the part of the Canucks throughout the rest of the game.
Posted by Alanah McGinley from British Columbia on 02/18/08 at 10:21 PM ET
The Cooke hit at the end boards deserved a few good minutes in the box no question. CBC showed a clip of Cooke saying ‘He knew I was coming!” pretty classic.
Can’t even remember who he hit there, but if I were a player in that same position I’d think twice about turning my face towards the boards. Not a good call by Cooke, but an equally dumb call but that d-man.
Posted by LOUiE from Cowtown on 02/18/08 at 10:28 PM ET
I’ll stick by what I said...the game was a farce and it was a farce from the opening faceoff.
Markus Naslund was provoked many times during the course of the game...and he walked away. Not only that, he burned the Oilers all night long...making Smid look like a fool most of the night. THAT is how you combat that type of play.
And to think, just two seasons ago, the Canucks were all about skating, scoring and flow and how everyone despised the slow-down, goon it up style of those ‘eastern’ teams. How much things have changed…
Posted by GZ Expat from Chiner on 02/18/08 at 11:49 PM ET
i think if we’re going to keep bring up ‘gooning’ or whatever, you have to bring up the refereeing.
The Stortini example Allanah brought up about him being called for, what was it, a harmless stick slash to the rest of his shenanigans is a great example of the inconsistent refereeing...and, to be fair, so was Cooke’s hit on the end-boards.
Dont get me wrong, I enjoyed the game. Call me cold blooded, but I’m a guy, it’s nice to see some passion out there on the ice, especially when I feel the Canucks have lost their edge lately. But I still think some ‘preventative’ refereeing could have taken care of a lot. They have to settle the game down. Both cbc commentators said the same thing and I have to agree.
Posted by LOUiE from Cowtown on 02/19/08 at 12:03 AM ET
Expat, have you been out of Canada for too long??? 
That game was excellent. The fighting....camaraderie. The Canucks are sticking together and I do believe it is a turning point.
Posted by Zanstorm from Smithers on 02/19/08 at 04:13 AM ET
This double throw-back to both the vintage jersey and the orca logo is a let down after so much media and corporate marketing melee.
This was an opportunity for originality and something fresh, to symbolize a team that might actually make it past the second round of the playoffs this year.
I feel tremendous disdain for the Orca logo. The skating lumberjack would have been more worth the effort. I think they should focus their energy on strengthening the Canucks offensive line instead of launching “new” jersey, which isn’t at all. Send Naslund back to Sweden.
Posted by chest pain from usa on 07/21/08 at 12:57 PM ET
Add a Comment
Please limit embedded image or media size to 575 pixels wide.
Add your own avatar by joining Kukla's Korner, or logging in and uploading one in your member control panel.
Captchas bug you? Join KK or log in and you won't have to bother.
Most Recent Blog Posts
In Defense of Dany Heatley (sort of)
Sedin’s Agent Not Optimistic About a Vancouver Deal, but is Anyone?
Mike Keenan Joins the Canucks?
GM Place Keeps its Name; Disaster Averted
What’s Trevor Linden Been Up To?
Sundin Positioning Himself For a Job
About Canucks & Beyond
Alanah McGinley has been blogging hockey since 2003, sharing opinions, rants and not-so-deep thoughts with anyone who will listen. In addition to writing Canucks & Beyond and helping manage Kukla’s Korner, Alanah is one of the founders and co-hosts of The Crazy Canucks Podcast, as featured at Canucks.com.
She has contributed pieces to FoxSports.com and the New York Times Slapshot blog, as well as other stray destinations in cyberspace.
Email:
Alanah’s Twitter: Not really hockey-ish. [LINK]
Other Canucks Blogs
You have friends who wear Hasek jerseys? Why?
And why doesn’t this post get the “impendng alcoholism” tag?
Posted by Greg from Atlanta on 02/18/08 at 10:51 AM ET