Some Canuck Fans Are Awful Human Beings

Canuck fans, upon hearing negative opinions regarding their team.

In the past few weeks, Kyle Wellwood, Mike Babcock, and Theo Fleury have all come under fire for some pretty offensive comments. Yes, unforgivable utterances, these. The things they said were so vile that it apparently became acceptable to forgo proper human decency and, instead, return their brutal statements with the worst slander, bigotry, and hatespeech Canucks fans could muster.

Just what did they say? Well, brace yourself. You see, each of them expressed skepticism that the Canucks' regular season dominance would extend into the playoffs.

Wellwood suggested the Canucks were too immature to handle playoff adversity. Babcock suggested Luongo might not have what it takes to lead the team to a Cup. Fleury suggested that, after coasting through the regular season, the Canucks were ripe for a first-round playoff upset. In truth, it was pretty harmless stuff, but the response from many Canuck fans was much less so.

As kneejerk vitriol goes, Kyle Wellwood and Mike Babcock got off easy. Granted, Canuck fans flipped the pool, and peppered both men with cheap, personal attacks, but most of it was pretty silly stuff. Welly's a soft target (so to speak), so bitter fan response didn't extend much further than jabs at his weight or the fact that he's a little weird. Mike Babcock, too, escaped relatively unscathed, because he's pretty hard to criticize. He's one of the NHL's finest coaches and a Cup finalist in three of his seven seasons behind the bench. The best Canuck fans could do on such short notice was embarrass themselves by calling him overrated, or a choke artist because he's only won one Stanley Cup (and World Championship, and Olympic gold medal).

Theo Fleury, on the other hand, had some pretty awful stuff floated his way. He's suffered some terrible trauma, and he's wrestled some demons. This is a guy who was sexually abused, and who has struggled with drug abuse for much of his adult life, and many Canuck fans, to the chagrin of the ones who still have souls, immediately went there. I won't repeat any of it, but you can just go ahead and imagine the worst, vilest things a person could spew at somebody who's been through what Fleury has, and it's probable someone said it.

And why? Because he had the nerve to suggest the Canucks weren't going to win the Stanley Cup. It was appalling. Regrettably, being an awful human being doesn't preclude one from being a Canucks fan. It was embarrassing to have anything in common with these dirtbags.

PITB apologizes on behalf of any Canucks fan who realizes that saying crap like this is not okay. Presumably, we're speaking for the majority here.

The bitter reactions are especially embarrassing because none of these statements called for anything other than a dismissive shrug. Wellwood, Babcock, and Fleury's statements couldn't possibly have been more ignorable. What's a few "no confidence" votes? The Stanley Cup isn't decided that way.

In truth, all we had here were a few extremely biased opinions. Lest we forget: Wellwood plays for the Sharks; Babcock coaches the Red Wings; and Fleury is a lifelong Flame. These guys have allegiances to Western Conference teams that will have to go through the Canucks to win the Stanley Cup, so when they predict the Canucks will fall, it's little more than optimistic fan chatter. Their opinion is no more objective than Fred from Minneapolis who thinks the Wild are close.

In future, the best response to anyone's lack of belief in Vancouver, especially the fans of other teams, is the one Roberto Luongo gave yesterday when presented with Fleury's prediction: "Who cares?"

Unfortunately, many Canuck fans simply couldn't muster such brevity.

Please Do Not Flip the Pool

Sports fans go nuts when things don't make sense to them.

Have you looked at the Western Conference standings recently? If you're a Vancouver fan, you probably haven't, you smug bastard, so let me fill you in: there are 2 points separating the 5th-place team and the 10th-place team. This is where you gasp, or maybe here: of those six very good teams, only four will be making the playoffs.

If you didn't gasp, you obviously don't live in Chicago, Los Angeles, Nashville, Anaheim, Dallas, or Calgary. For fans and players of those teams, it's a stressful time; every game in the Conference has meaning, even the ones in which your team doesn't play.

However, for the time being, Canucks fans are taking it easy. It's a pleasant feeling, this--a rare feeling. When it comes to these late-season clusters, the Canucks are regularly in the thick of things. This year, however, where Vancouver is nine points clear of second-place Detroit, and seventeen points clear of the aforementioned thick.

Enjoy it while it lasts, Canuck nation. In ten games, everyone starts back at zero.

Considering the Canucks are currently 103 points from zero--the furthest from zero of any team in the NHL--that's going to be pretty hard to stomach, but it's what happens. In truth, all the regular season does is determine where games will take place; what takes place during those games cannot be predicted.

Anything can happen in the playoffs. Couple that with the team's lofty expectations, and you have the potential for the largest letdown in the history of Vancouver sports.

Think about it: in past years, the Canucks have gone into the postseason no higher than the second seed in the West. They've lost every time, too, but really, what did we expect? They've never been the best. Year after year, we were effectively banking on the same chance that could bite us now, banking on the Canucks playing better than they reasonably should have. In each case, the eventual loss simply operated as a reality check. The annual ousting has always been begrudgingly received, justified by the sad truth that, despite our optimistic denial, the Canucks were never the best team.

In the history of Vancouver hockey, there was one instance when our expectations got out of control. Do you remember when it was? The year was 1994. In 1982, we could understand the loss, because it was the Islanders; In 1994, we couldn't justify anything. We seemed unstoppable, and despite that, we were stopped. It hardly made sense.

Sports fans go nuts when things don't make sense to them. 1994 didn't make sense. So we rioted. We flipped the pool.

This year's expectations may also be unreasonable. In fact, they may also be beyond reason. Considering the year we've seen, the unprecedented success, the broken records, a loss this year would hardly make sense.

It's going to be very hard to justify a playoff loss this year, to understand it, and there's really no guarantee that it's not coming. Granted, the Canucks are the best team, in theory: they lead almost every major statistical category and they've got elite goaltending, defense, scoring, special teams, depth and leadership. Sure, there are a lot of reasons they might win and a lot of reasons they should be predicted to do so.

But they still might just lose, for no other reason than because one out of every two teams has to, and, eventually, fifteen of sixteen. And we need to be able to accept that without breaking stuff.

Let's be clear: if it wasn't possible for the best team in theory to lose in reality, there'd be no point in staging the playoffs at all. It happens, often for no discernible reason. The pundits can point to a lack of some intangible, to a choke, a collapse, or even simply the perfect matchup for the underdog, but those are typically just ways for the experts to explain away the sad truth of their field: at its base, everything they say is worthless because hockey, like any game, can be completely random.

I say this not to be a downer, but rather, so that nobody flips the pool.

A Road Canuck Fan's Guide on How Not to Be a Jerk*

Video from outside Staples Center after the Kings game. Looks like a lot of fun. Fun is good.

Wow, it was exhilarating to go to the Ducks game. I met Daniel and Harrison, and their wives, and that was pretty amazing. We were also surrounded by Canucks fans. Living in California, I only see the Canucks when they're on the road against the Ducks or the Kings. I cheer loud, but I'm usually shouted down. Not last night.

Still, there were moments where I was a little embarrassed. The Canucks fans I saw were passionate, yes, but also -- dare I say? -- impolite at times. I don't want Canucks fans to be hated league-wide. That would suck. What would suck even more, though, is if the Canucks were hated for good reason. For that reason, let's discuss what is and is not good form.

The Anthem

Good Form: Singing along with the Canadian anthem. Your patriotism is an inspiration. After the Canadian anthem comes the American one, and you'll often hear the Americans around you singing along with it. A friend once took me to a Ducks-Thrashers game. There was no singing along of any kind. It's a nice thought that Canadian fans on the road inspire locals to be more patriotic. And no one can really fault you for it. (Note: The poor Americans. O Canada is a song pretty much anyone can sing. The Star Spangled Banner, on the other hand, is usually better left to the professionals.)

Bad Form: Booing the American anthem, sitting down for it, putting your hat on for it, etc. Come on. You hate when Philly fans boo the Canadian anthem. And for good reason -- it's a jerk thing to do. I bet their Canadian players don't like it, either. Come to think of it, Kesler probably doesn't like hearing HIS national anthem boo'd. But then, he hates Canada either way. Don't do this.

Chants and Cheers

Good Form: Go Canucks Go! It challenges the other fans to chant "Go Ducks Go" or "Go Kings Go," etc. The more plentiful and passionate fans will have their chant heard. Great fun.

Bad Form: Ref you suck! Ref you suck! This is always a bad cheer. Even at home games, and even if the ref sucks.

Good Form: Luuuu. Of course, there are times and places for the Luuuu. Never, for instance, when Schnieder is playing.

Bad Form: Na Na Na, Hey Hey, Goodbye. Remember, this is a ROAD guide. The Na Na Na, Hey Hey, Goodbye chant has a very specific time when it's okay: During the dying minutes of a playoff elimination game in which your team is comfortably in the lead at home. Why is this okay? Because you're sending the other team home, and in the playoffs, the other team is always a bunch of jerks. I understand that it's a magnificent feeling being able to sing that song, but you can't force it. Then you're just the guy trying to start a slow clap. Never do this when your team isn't comfortably in the lead. Remember, Montreal fans did this against the Leafs with just a two-goal lead and the Leafs came back to win in OT. Never do this for a non-playoff game, because there's always next game for them. Never do this for a road game. At the end of the game, win or lose, you're the ones leaving town.

Good Form: Taunting the goaltender after a bad goal, or when he's playing poorly. Goaltenders are under more pressure at home, and if you think nerves are going to be a factor, taunting the goaltender can put him off his game. If chants are supposed to raise your team up, this one might affect the game.

Bad Form: Taunting a goaltender after a goal that wasn't his fault, or when he's not playing poorly. Goaltenders know the difference. When you taunt a goaltender who isn't playing poorly, you strengthen his resolve. I've seen Canucks fans turn truly awful goaltenders into monsters. Like the Na Na Na, Hey Hey, Goodbye chant, this one has its place.

Good Form: Cheering. You cheer a great goal, that's cool. You cheer a great shift, that's also cool. As long as you aren't cheering injuries, no one's going to be upset with you for cheering. You're supposed to enjoy the game.

Bad Form: Olé, Olé chant before the end of a game. In general, I associate this with Montreal, and you never want to be like Montreal fans. Still, it's sort of a Canuck fan to do the Olé thing after the final whistle. Fine... after the final whistle. The song is declaring victory. Doesn't matter if there's only a minute left and the score is 7-1 in your favor -- wait for the buzzer.

Good Form: The "Wooo" after a goal. I love the Canucks doing that. I love that they spread it to other arenas. I love the exuberant joy in the sound. Keep it going. Maybe they'll score again.

Bad Form: The "Wooo" after a goal. I don't know. I guess some people find it annoying. Oh well.

General Behavior

Good Form: When talking hockey with an opposing fan, find something nice to say about the team. They've paid money to come see the team, so there's got to be something they like. If you say something like, "That Fowler's got amazing talent, I can't believe he fell to 13 in the draft," they'll think Vancouver fans at least aren't as bad as those Maple Leaf jerks.

Bad Form: Talking real crap about the opposing team. It still grinds my gears to hear "Sedin Sisters," I'm sure Pens fans don't like to hear that Crosby's a crybaby, and the same's true of these fans. If your team's doing better than the other team, coming in and rubbing it in is just plain rude. Don't act like you're following your amazing team around, and you're upset that it meant you had to go through this dump of a hockey town. No one likes that guy. You don't have to suck up to the team, but again, try not to seem like a Canadiens fan.

Good Form: Having fun with your fellow Canucks fans. High fives all around when they score.

Bad Form: Having fun at the expense of the opposing fans. Don't shout "in your FACE!" unless the person's done something to really convince you they deserve it, like kicking a baby, spilling beer on you, or saying "The Sedin Sisters aren't first line talent." You're there to support the Canucks, not to tear down the Sharks. Take joy in your team's success, not in the other team's failure.

Good Form: Congregating with your fellow Canucks fans after a win and cheering, high-fiving, and being a little bit too loud (cause that never hurt no one).

Bad Form: Desecration of statues with Canucks garb. I know it's all in good fun, but Gretzky was never a Canuck. The Mighty Ducks statue was never a Canuck. To local fans, the Canucks are just a visiting team. The statue or monument is bigger than this game. If the Canucks just won the Cup in the opposing team's building, then maybe I can see being excited enough to do something like that. Most of the time, though, you're just convincing others that all Vancouverites are stupid drunks.

Good Form: Be considerate of those who are frustrated if the Canucks win. I know I've been frustrated after a particularly embarrassing Canucks loss, I'm sure most fans have been there -- at least the ones willing to travel to see games. Don't taunt opposing fans too much after a loss, and don't take it seriously if they don't seem to share your joy. A lot of teams are battling for playoff places. Every win for the Canucks is a loss for another team, and often it's an unhappy part of a narrative. Be respectful of that.

Bad Form: Idiot stuff. Getting too drunk. Starting fights. Keying cars. Breaking stuff. Stealing Ducks flags off of people's cars. Come on, you're visiting. Don't be bad guests. Jeff Miller of the OC Register said "It wouldn't have been surprising had the Ducks gone out to the parking lot afterward and found that their cars had been keyed." Now, that's ridiculous, and I didn't see anyone keying cars. Still, I did see a few clearly uncomfortable Ducks fans during this celebration. One woman looked like she was actually afraid for her safety. That shouldn't happen.

Canucks road trips are awesome. I've always felt that the fans who travel with the team are showing some sort of solidarity with the players who have to travel the most in the NHL. It's a stupid romantic idea but either way, there's nothing like meeting fellow Canucks fans who traveled down to support the team. Surrounded usually by Ducks fans, Kings fans, and non-hockey fans, I really appreciate the times when I can share the joy of a Nucks goal with those around me. Then one of the Canucks fans does something to be a jerk and I feel bad about the way my hometown, one of the greatest cities on the planet, is being represented. So DO have fun, but please try not to be a jerk.*

*"Jerk," of course, being a euphemism

What Do You Want, Canucks Fans?

After Wednesday's loss against the Anaheim Ducks, the prevailing opinion amongst Canuck fandom was that the Canucks got outmuscled. This opinion could be heard from callers on the Team 1040, read on threads posted on Canucks.com, and absorbed by osmosis from articles written by Brad Ziemer (you wouldn't want to actually read them). This sudden outcry was simultaneously baffling and expected. Baffling, because the goals scored against the Canucks were largely due to breakdowns in defensive coverage and not being outmuscled along the boards or in front of the net. Expected, as Dan Hamhuis left the game after a borderline hit from Ryan Getzlaf and no one stepped up to fight him.

Never mind that none of the Canucks actually saw the hit happen. Never mind that it looks like a perfectly innocent hit until Hamhuis crumples to the ice. Never mind that there honestly wouldn't have been any point in fighting Getzlaf. The lack of response from the Canucks in that moment is apparently indicative of a team-wide lack of toughness.

Fine. Let's say I agree.

Fastforward a couple days: Cody Hodgson gets sent down to the Manitoba Moose. Victor Oreskovich gets called up. A skilled young rookie who may not be ready for the physical play of the NHL goes down to the AHL to play more minutes and further seasoning. A big body who has played NHL-level hockey before is brought up. He's a physical presence, a guy who can crash and bang and occasionally drop the mitts. Oreskovich can be summed up in a word: tough. Clearly, this is the kind of move that the fans were calling for.

The response: callers on the Team 1040 complaining about Hodgson not getting a chance. Posters on Canucks.com crying foul. Random fan bloggers on the Vancouver Sun website shocked.

On one day, Canucks fans and media are bemoaning the lack of toughness on the Canuck roster. A couple days later, a move is made that increases the Canucks' overall team toughness, and Canucks fans and media bemoan the move. And all this after the Canucks' first loss in seven games. What do you want, Canucks fans? Do you even know what you want?

This shouldn't have been a surprise. Harrison had it mostly right when he described the purpose of the fourth line as prospect development. But it's not necessarily about getting on the ice during the games. It's not even necessarily about evaluating their ability to play at the NHL level. It's about familiarity with the team, the routine, and the practice regimen. It's about knowing what it is to be a Canuck. It's about creating familiarity, so that when these players need to step into the lineup in high-pressure situations (ie. the playoffs), they are facing only one challenge instead of two.

In the end, this move isn't about increasing team toughness or disrespecting a top prospect: it's about acquainting each of the Canucks' prospects with the NHL experience so it's not a shock later on. This makes complaints in the wake of Hodgson being sent down to the Moose even more ludicrous. Hodgson will be back in the NHL before too long; in the meantime, he'll get first-line minutes with the Moose while playing 6 games in 9 nights. But 20 games from now, as injuries crop up, I don't want Oreskovich to be facing his first NHL action of the season as the playoffs approach. I don't want him to be trying to figure out the Canucks' morning routine or the practice schedule with the weight of playoff hockey on his mind.

And seriously, people calling into the Team 1040: chill out.

This Is Not a Story: Roberto Luongo Edition

On Wednesday night, the Canucks continued their stellar streak, winning their 7th game in a row. They are 16-1-2 in their last 19 games. Daniel Sedin scored the 10,000th goal in franchise history. Luongo put up 43 saves and was named the 1st star of the game. And, oh yeah, he didn't come out onto the ice after being named the 1st star like he normally does.

One of these things is not like the others. One of these things just doesn't belong. One of these things is not a story.

And yet, the coverage immediately following the game from both the Vancouver Sun and Province hockey blogs would seem to indicate that the biggest story of the entire night was Luongo not skating out for the first star. And Jason Botchford for the Province devoted an entire article to this complete non-story.

Now don't get me wrong, I like Botchford a lot, and to his credit, the article's lede even admits that this story is nothing. In fact, the article almost seems to be apologizing for even existing and it makes a good point about Luongo playing with emotion and passion. In fact, another version of the article even outright says it's a non-story in the headline. It's just a shame that something so non-story-like gets treated like it is in fact a story. To be fair, Botchford's article seems forced into existence by the fact it was being talked about at all. For that we can blame some of the more incendiary reactions by the media.

The initial reaction of Brad Ziemer is the most unnecessarily over-the-top, referring to the action as a "snub" and a "mistake," and suggesting that Luongo should have "sucked it up" and that he should "make sure it doesn't happen again." Seriously?

Let's break this down: Luongo is not required to come out onto the ice when he is named one of the stars of the game. Period. It's certainly something that most players do on home ice and fans have certainly come to expect it, but he is not required to do it. What's more, Luongo has consistently made a habit of giving away his goalie stick whenever he is named first star. Again, this is something that isn't required of him, but because he has done it so much it's become expected. As fans, we have no right to be upset when an athlete doesn't do something that isn't required of him. Even if you get into the argument that "we pay his salary" or something ridiculous like that, Luongo earned his paycheck by stopping 43 shots to win the game for the Canucks. Anything else on top of that is gravy.

The fact that Luongo has, in every other game in which he was named first star, skated onto the ice and given his stick to a kid in the crowd is commendable. When he doesn't do it one time, because he is upset about something that happened less than a minute before, it doesn't matter. It's not a story. It is, at most, something to briefly mention in a game recap in connection to how passionate Roberto Luongo is about his performance.

And to fans who do think it's a big deal: get a life. Find something better to complain about, because clearly you feel the need to complain about something. Maybe complain about how meaningless the Grammys have become or how stupid it is that Scott Pilgrim vs. The World was a box-office bomb. Just don't complain about idiotic things like this.