This morning, a couple of talk show hosts from Vancouver sports radio station, Team 1040, were commenting on the Roberto Luongo pad issue.
For those of you who haven't heard, the Dallas Stars allegedly complained to the NHL before the start of last year's playoffs that the Canucks goalie's knee flaps—which stuck out of his pads—gave him an unfair advantage.
Those flaps were supposedly helping Luongo make more saves.
Then in December, Stars goalies Marty Turco and Mike Smith jokingly put on home-made mock flaps during a morning skate to perhaps seemingly further insinuate that Luongo's pads had been illegal.
In reality, the knee flaps worn by Luongo supposedly are for protective purposes and nothing more, and some other goalies in the league use them too, most notably Stanley Cup champion Jean-Sebastien Giguere of the Anaheim Ducks.
A couple months ago, when the complaints by the Stars surfaced, the NHL had allowed Luongo to continue using the pads after checking the equipment. And that was also okayed during the Stars-Canucks first-round playoff series last spring too.
The reason that this is now an issue is that the league has apparently reversed its ruling, and has asked Luongo to remove the flaps.
And get this: apparently other goalies in the league will still be allowed to wear theirs.
Double standards? In professional sports? Welcome to the NHL.
Apparently an unofficial statement issued by Kay Whitmore—a former Canuck goalie who is now part of the league's "goalie police" department dealing with equipment issues—to The Province, a newspaper in Vancouver, was that the controversial ruling was handed down was due to the way Luongo was wearing his pads.
According to comments made by the morning show hosts in Vancouver, this is supposedly a good thing.
They believe this ruling will motivate Luongo to take his game to the next level.
They hope he will play with a chip on his shoulder, and prove to the rest of the league that he can be one of the world's best goalies in spite of this gamesmanship displayed by the Stars.
Hello? Make Luongo mad and he'll shut the door on the rest of the league?
What do these media guys know anyway?
Has Luongo proven to be in the same class as a guy like Patrick Roy, who you can certainly suggest played well when challenged in that manner?
Roy was a multiple Stanley Cup winner.
What has Luongo won?
One playoff round in his NHL career, that's what.
For these talk show hosts to even remotely suggest that Luongo may now step up and take charge because of this controversy is laughable.
Now, the hosts didn't mention Roy's name, but if you try and read between the lines, they are saying that Luongo is suddenly going to have this unbeatable aura because of this controversy and have a "us-against-the-world" mentality.
Very few athletes have been able to take it to that kind of level. Certainly none in Vancouver's non-storied history.
But perhaps now the media guys are going to say that Vancouver should plan a parade for this team come June, too.
Better start printing those Stanley Cup tickets and plan a route for the championship celebrations!
And oh, by the way, guess what? Peter Forsberg isn't going to Vancouver either.
I guess the Vancouver media will suggest that the Canucks will land Mats Sundin or some other big name before the trading deadline too!
Is there anyone else out there who has a take on this goalie equipment/Luongo controversy? Discuss.
13 comments Last one added about 1 year ago — Leave a Comment
Anonymous about 1 year ago
What controversy? It's a non-issue.
Luongo played like a god against Nashville tonight. Guess that goes against your theory. Maybe he does have a chip on his shoulder. Or just maybe, he's the best goalie in the NHL and can challenge himself to take it to the next level just because he wants to win . . . .
Why the hate for Luongo? He's only 28 . . . how do you know what his future career will look like? Sure he hasn't won anything . . . he played for FLORIDA!! The first year he came to Vancouver he almost won the Vezina trophy (and should have won it outright according to some).
Also, basing your article on a morning show isn't exactly the height of journalism. Why not come up with your own material?
Edit Comment Cancel
Anonymous about 1 year ago
This article is poorly written and offers nothing in the way of support for the writer's misguided opinions.
If it was Patrick Roy playing in Florida during Luongo's tenure, how many Stanley Cups would he have lead the Panthers to? And why does that matter? The importance of one's personal accomplishments is hard to judge when said individual play a TEAM sport. Darren McCarty has what, 3 Stanley Cups? I guess he's better than most of the players in the NHL?
"What do these media guys know anyway?"
What do these ignorant, biased, and misguided wannabe sports writers know?
Also, looking at Mr. KP Wee's last few articles, his obvious hate for Vancouver could not be any clearer; the guy outright states his disdain for the Canucks. I also discovered that his understanding of the game of hockey is surprisingly below par.
There also appears to be a degree of jealously in the tone of his past writings with regards to Luongo. Sorry guy, not all teams can have the best goalie in the world on their team.
KP Wee, don't quit your day job, and no, I don't want fries with that.
Edit Comment Cancel
KP Wee about 1 year ago
If you want to use white trash jokes "I don't want fries with that", go do it elsewhere. If you think people like you that post anonymously intimidate me, you've got to be kidding. But don't worry, I'll be the one laughing at the end of the year when the Canucks fall flat on their faces.
Why root for losers? People that do so must fall into that category too.
And if we were to take a poll right now, Luongo would not be ranked No. 1.
Sorry Mr. Anon, the joke's on you.
Edit Comment Cancel
Anonymous about 1 year ago
Patrick Roy won the cup?
All by himself?
Well that's how you made it sound.
Flip out your Palm Treo or iPhone... (Because you're obviously a rich man that doesn't work at a McDonalds), and look up the roster's for the cup teams that Roy has won on.
Roy had oodles, and oodles of help. Luongo isn't ranked 1?!? Psh, give me a break!
Till next time, KP falls Wee short of his article.
Edit Comment Cancel
KP Wee about 1 year ago
Actually, I WILL respond to the guy that said "Point 4: Blog writing != ability to write a book" in the "Open Letter to Canucks Fans" post aka. the same guy who said "Patrick Roy won the cup?" above.
I really could care less what you think, but...
UPDATE: NON-FICTION SHORT STORY SET TO BE PUBLISHED CIRCA JUNE 2008; CONTRACT ALREADY SIGNED WITH BOOK PUBLISHER JANUARY '08.
I don't usually brag about myself as writing is really just a matter of self-fulfillment/personal satisfaction, but since a lot of anonymous people wonder.... well, there's your answer. And no, I don't care one bit if any naysayers read it or what they have to say.
KP Wee
Edit Comment Cancel
Anonymous about 1 year ago
"And if we were to take a poll right now, Luongo would not be ranked No. 1."
You may wish to pick up the most recent issue of THN. You know, the goalie issue? Where they take a poll ranking the goalies?
(Source: http://mirtle.blogspot.com/2008/02/thn-ranks-goalies.html)
1. Luongo
2. Nabokov
3. Brodeur
4. Leclaire
5. Osgood
6. Giguere
7. Vokoun
8. Miller
9. Lundqvist
10. Turco
11. Kiprusoff
12. Hasek
13. Thomas
14. Bryzgalov
15. Conklin
...and so on. Granted it's based on this year and it's just a list, but it is a poll (of THN staff and NHL scouts).
But don't let evidence to the contrary stand in the way of a good diatribe, right?
Edit Comment Cancel
KP Wee about 1 year ago
I don't like Patrick Roy. I have never said I liked Roy. His first two Cup wins in Montreal were flukes, where all the top teams were KO'ed early (1986, 1993)... but that's a totally different subject. The point is that the media has said that Roy rises to the occasion when he has this chip on the shoulder. So, that was the comparison. Roy has "proven" that he could do it when he was upset.
Luongo, on the other hand, hasn't. So, for the Team 1040 to say that Luongo may be able to rise to the occasion is debatable.
My points didn't come out that way and that's my fault.
But THAT was my point.
Edit Comment Cancel
Anonymous about 1 year ago
LUONGO is awsome i just think that we need to get better offense players to get more goals. Luongo cant save, and score at the same time. come on coach why wont you actuly trade cook for some good offense player
Edit Comment Cancel
Anonymous about 1 year ago
LUONGO is awsome i just think that we need to get better offense players to get more goals. Luongo cant save, and score at the same time. come on coach why wont you actuly trade cook for some good offense player
Edit Comment Cancel
Anonymous about 1 year ago
LUONGO is awsome i just think that we need to get better offense players to get more goals. Luongo cant save, and score at the same time. come on coach why wont you actuly trade cook for some good offense player
Edit Comment Cancel
Anonymous about 1 year ago
LUONGO is awsome i just think that we need to get better offense players to get more goals. Luongo cant save, and score at the same time. come on coach why wont you actuly trade cook for some good offense player
Edit Comment Cancel
Anonymous about 1 year ago
LUONGO is awsome i just think that we need to get better offense players to get more goals. Luongo cant save, and score at the same time. come on coach why wont you actuly trade cook for some good offense player
Edit Comment Cancel
Anonymous about 1 year ago
LUONGO is awsome i just think that we need to get better offense players to get more goals. Luongo cant save, and score at the same time. come on coach why wont you actuly trade cook for some good offense player
Edit Comment Cancel
Leave a Comment
You must register to post a comment.