After seeing the latest tempest in a teapot from our inestimable scribes in regards to our Mr Roberto Luongo, I thought it time again. While some in the media gave the latest non story some real insight, there seems to be a vocal minority getting all in a tizzy in regards to whether or not the man should have been there to watch Murph' try to find a nice way to ask how it feels to lose a shutout in the last 10 seconds for the second time this season. I am OK with having our franchise guy CARE. But some have actually said he insulted the fans!!
You make your own mind up about that one. I think its a whole bunch of indignation for nothing, but the TEAM,SNET and two papers have to have something to talk about. Donny even said as much before doing the story. I just wish they would cut the guy some slack, given the outstanding game he had put in to ensure the good ship JuggerNuck keeps sailing up the standings. Ignoring the fact he outright won a game that his team was not fully in, stopping 43 shots and making it look easy.
I had no idea those stick giveaways were such a big deal at Rogers Place. Live and learn...All Roberto Luongo has done since the "you know which game I am talking about" vs. the Hawks ( they are always involved in the narrative somehow, huh? ), where no one showed up and...well, we know the result, all he has done since then is play in 15 games. In those, he has allowed two or less goals in all but four games. The Detroit 5-4 O/T loss that we all know about. Posted a shutout against those same Chicago-ans (-ites, -ers, eans, burghers?) Pretty good right?
The other three were a weird 5-4 shootout win vs the Ducks,(hey, I WON a shootout!) where the Canucks outshot their opponent two to one. A home loss three days earlier to the Blues 3-2, and the 3-2 home loss to the Coyotes the day after "The Game That Shall Not Be Named".
Thats it. Before that little hiccup with the Blues, Ducks and maybe Phoenix, the man has been, basically, lights out. The Wings game can be ascribed to a couple weak goals and a wonderful display of the artistry of the game from both teams. My client throws himself at the mercy of the court for that one. But I submit to the jury M'lord, that my client could have as many as six more shutouts since the team has been on this run, including the most recent one that has brought him before your bench.
-SJ / Nov 26 - only a slick little wrist shot from Heatley in the slot beat our man, in a 6-1 game that was closer early.
-Coilers / Dec 12 - the shittiest of the almost bagels. 12 fucking shots, and one in the third, a crappy little greasy goal that never should have happened. The funniest thing is the recap calling Eberle's shot a "snapshot". Looked more like a football running play.
-Leafs / Dec 18 - Grabovski's deceptively heavy shot is the only one of 28 to beat our beat poet goalie in another solid performance.
-Blues / Dec 20 - deserved better in a very solid 3-1 Win. The Blues only shot of 29, a very good backhand ( he seems to score more on that side of the stick than the other! ) by Steen late in the 2nd to deny the goose-egg to good Sir Robert.
-Avs / Jan 2 - yeah Stastny, you barely got that one in with 6:25 to go to give your team false hope. But it was the only one of 32 to get in, and the write up in your teams' media was all the other goalie kicking your team further down the ladder. Thanks for playing...
Against this backdrop, losing the shutout, in shitty fashion to another shitty Alberta team ( well, better that night. Even if most of the 44 shots were low risk, 44 shots is 44 shots ), I for one can totally understand. Even in the fun little not worth talking about levels that I manned the crease in the distant and not so distant past ( was pretty kick ass over 40 floor hockey goalie before injury though! ;-), stopping everything the other guys throw at you IS a big deal.
It is of course a team thing, and to be shared. But when the last line of defense, in a game where its usually the mistakes that results in the scoring, stops them all, it is worthy of notice. Not a goalie being selfish, maybe more of an acknowledgement of a job well done for all to see. Something for the other coach to tell his guys. Something good for our team and bad for the opponents. You think the other coach does not mention the five shutouts the other tender has when his team plays the Rangers, Bruins, and Panthers even? ( Lundqvist, Thomas, and Vokoun respectively )
The fact some of our more reactionary media chose instead to chastise our franchise goaltender for something like not coming out to chat with Murph' and give a stick away is just nonsensical to me. Its not like the guy was being selfish. he was just a little emotional. I don't need to hear a few pat answers in that circumstance. I am OK with a little fire. Maybe it is just me.
Besides, Bieksa was entertaining as hell.
We Are All Canucks. Even when we need to find something to whine, bitch, complain, get indignant, talk about.