Thursday, May 15, 2014

Shame on the CBC Ron Maclean and Don Cherry

I've never been much of a fan of Don Cherry and his aw shucks country slicker attitude that seems so endearing to the Anglo lunch bucket hockey brigade.
I know how valuable he is to the network, he is an absolute rating bombshell having witnessed his popularity on a Air Nova flight out to Moncton from Montreal where the idiot was actually dressed in a slightly toned down version of his signature  floppy dress.
So many passengers on the small BAe146 wanted to come up to first class for an autograph that I was sure the small jet would become dangerously unbalanced. Cherry is quite the showman and with every autograph he'd talk about the home town of the person receiving his signature with a comment about the people he knew from area. Apparently Cherry knows a lot of people.

Cherry wears his Bruins and Toronto loyalty on his sleeve without reservation and that is a problem for a network proclaiming to be the premiere hockey broadcaster in the world.

There's an unwritten rule in quality national broadcasts that forbid commentators from using the dreaded 'WE' or "THEM' in describing the play by play action or in between period analysis. I remember that I would actually cringe listening to the ancient and insufferable Howie Meeker, the original Gee Whiz yahoo, speaking of the Leafs with such comments as, "We need to press" or "They look shaky now"

The hallmark of quality broadcasters like TSN or NBCSports, is a professional and neutral demeanor, where Habs booster Pierre McGuire wouldn't dare  wear a Montreal Canadiens cap during a broadcast as wouldn't Mike Milbury dare wear Bruins regalia during his appearances.
The same goes for their comment and observations, made professionally and untainted by their own personal loyalty which is left at the broadcast booth door.

Then there is the CBC with idiots like Ron Maclean and Don Cherry cheering for the Leafs even if they aren't playing, or for the Bruins, even if the opponent is a Canadian team.
It goes over big in Ontario and perhaps out West, but it is unprofessional to the nth degree and goes against the grain of what the CBC is supposed to represent.

The current run by the Montreal Canadiens has been tainted by the disgusting and biased treatment of the Canadian team by the CBC which is utterly bewildering.

From Ron Maclean's proclamation that French Canadian referees should be excluded from certain games because of the appearance of bias, to Don Cherry actually showing up to the Game Seven broadcast bedecked in a Boston Bruins jacket and using his segment to accuse referees of bias in favour of the Canadiens, something he did over his entire career as an excuse to losing to the the Habs on a consistent basis. Watch him whine about refereeing, proof positive that he's part of Bruin's nation, because you can't cheer for the Bruins without whinging over refereeing!

As for the rest of the crew, they spent the beginning of game six discussing what the Bruins must do to beat the Canadiens, not what the Canadiens need to do to beat the Bruins.

The CBC has lost the hockey rights and I couldn't be happier. I hope Rogers snaps up all the excellent commentators over at TSN and takes a pass at every single person connected with the CBC, except for Bob (There's something going on here!) Cole, who they can hire as  comedy relief to describe games of no importance.

The worst in all this is that we are forced to endure the amateur bumpkins at the CBC because of blackouts of the very professional NBC Sports alternate coverage.

While the Canadiens have made it to the conference round, the big news today at Hockey night in Canada is whether Dion Phaneuf will be stripped of his 'C'.

It's a little frustrating to see our national  broadcaster rooting against the only Canadian team left in the playoffs.
I can't wait for the demise of Hockey Night in Canada, an organization so dumb as to let the most famous theme song in sports get sold from under them to a rival.

So to HNIC I say, pack it in...go...vamoose  and good riiddence.....WE SHALL NOT MISS YOU!

We Montreal Canadiens fans will be happy to sing you out of the building,
♩ ♪ ♫     
Na na na na, hey hey-ey, goodbye!
Na na na na, na na na na, hey hey-ey, goodbye!
♫ ♬ ♭
As luck would have it I'll be out of town for the first two games of the Rangers finals, but will at least have the opportunity to watch the games on NBC Sports.

Where will I be?...Ironically in NYC.

Enjoy some moments of that great game seven victory! Go Hab Go!


  1. Don cherry can kiss our Habs ass this morning!
    I hope someone kicks him where the sun don't shine the next time he goes on about being "A Great Canadian".

  2. Editor: Funny remark that top-heavy little plane engine!

    I actually wrote McLean several years ago about a crack he made re a trade where the Habs acquired an English speaking player in exchange for a French one. That was back in the 80s, so his WASPy ways have been going on forever. HNIC has always favoured the Leafs over the Canadiens at every turn.

    During the abbreviated 1994-95 season, after two months of no hockey, HNIC started with classic games about three weeks before the strike in that year was finally settled. In the 1958-59 season, the Habs played in the finals against the Leafs. The Habs were in the throes of their Drive for Five Cups in a row, and that year they only lost one game in the entire playoffs (just two rounds back in the days of the Original Six). So there it was, April 1959, the Habs won 8 of 9 games played, and the jackassed WASPs at HNIC decide as the classic game to show the one game the Leafs beat the Habs.

    Another of the three games they showed (although I admit I phoned in that line that charged 50 cents per call to vote for that game) was the May 10, 1979 Game 7 supposedly infamous to Grapes forever with that too many men on the ice penalty. I did really want to see it because when it took place, I and two travelling buddies were on a Greyhound bus en route between Salt Lake City and Las Vegas. That was one leg of a five-week trip we took through North America.

    We would call our parents on rotation every few days, and while we were told that game was a classic, we never got to see it. Almost two weeks later, we were on a tour of Muir Woods near San Francisco when a fellow from Boston gave us a bit of an earful about that game, but again, no real details. Seeing that game was after 15 years of wondering what actually happened, and WOW that 50 cents was worth every penny! I wish I got to see it live, but these things happen.

    Grapes will never live that night down until his dying day. As for the biased refereeing, you know what Grapes can do to amuse himself with what's left of his octogenerian genitalia. Late in the game last night, that overgrown animal, Chara, was holding a Habs stick, no penalty. I'm pleased as punch Lucic is out and he displayed his sour grapes at the end. He and that Marchand character are two of the dirtiest players in the League. Let 'em play golf!

  3. All this digital ink wasted!

    Don Cherry is a pontificating fool. He's only one step away from the clown act of Pauline Marois herself.

    Who dresses better is also up for grabs.

    Cherry is on CBC not as an announcer but as editorial. It's no different from the Gazette wasting paper and killing tree's telling people to support the Francophones is crushing store signs.

    We are meant to mock them. That's why people watch.

    Perhaps Tom Ford and Don Cherry are related. It's not a sure thing like any two francophone quebecers.

    1. So someone txt me earlier with this...."We TUKKKAAA game 7!!!" ...cute

      The Bruins are not being spared in their local papers...totally expected of course. I almost feel bad for them...NOT!

  4. I say perspective is everything. Try being an Ottawa fan. How much regard do you think the CBC gives US? Pretty much none.

    At least the CBC acknowledges your team.

    Cry me a river...

    1. I would agree with you, the CBC shoes disdain for the habs but the sens are an after thought at best"oh they are in the playoffs? I guess we could cheer for them" And they did last year. CBC has way too many people that don't just dislike the habs but actively cheer against them. Including the redundant duo, Ron and Don. This hab fan is happy the CBC lost the rights given how terrible they became over the last 15 years.

  5. Mr. Berlach,

    Whom then is Dr. Berlach cheering for, being a New Yorker?

    1. Are you kidding????
      You can take the boy out of Mtl., but you can never take the Habs out of the boy. All Mtl expats remain loyal Habs fans, no matter what!
      My 4 yr old grandson has already been indoctrinated in to the cult of Habs, having taken his most precious photo with Youppi bedecked in the blue-white -red.
      I cannot believe that I find myself in NYC this weekend, but will cut short my trip to attend game 2 in Mtl, perhaps coming back to NYC nxt Fri to attend game 3 or 4.
      Playoff runs are precious, for the information of Leaf fans.

    2. Hey, hey, hey... That is a cheap shot. I remain not a Leaf fan.

      However, Torontonians may also tell Montrealers that NBA playoff runs are also precious, something that Montreal will never, ever experience. And this comes from a not Raptor fan.

  6. Also, I think I, the Editor and Mississauga are ready for our fried crow dish for our comments earlier in the season regarding Danny Briere.

    1. Not really, Troy, although it's about time that wheel of brie we paid $4½ mil for is doing SOMETHING to salvage some of that overly generous paycheque of his. It's too bad he has another year because I'd really prefer the Habs do whatever they have to in order to sign Thomas Vanek in the off-season. Hopefully this long Cup run will be an inducement to Vanek after the season ends.

    2. @sauga

      " It's too bad he has another year because I'd really prefer the Habs do whatever they have to in order to sign Thomas Vanek..."

      there's enough money under the roof for both. and subban. and others. if vanek goes it will have nothing to do with brière's contract. you'll have to find another way to build up a case against one of the too few french canadians on the montreal team.

    3. @student

      Who cares how many francophones are on the team. Its an English team, live with it.

    4. @tom

      "Who cares how many francophones are on the team."

      francophones do.

    5. @Student

      You don’t speak for all “francophones”, only for yourself. Very bad, delusional comment, mate.

      There are a great many francophones who are not blinkered in life the way you are with strong PQ propaganda. And they’re extremely happy to belt out “O Canada” with Ginette Reno.

      Francophones should be proud to be playing (and coaching) throughout the NHL, not only with a single club, just as all the other Canadians, Europeans and Americans are also proud. What a stereotypical cocooned seppie you are... not a team player at all… always living in the past… yeesh!

      I forgive your errant ways, though. The PQ propaganda has been very effective on you.

    6. @marty sl

      "You don’t speak for all “francophones”

      of course.

      "There are a great many francophones who are not blinkered in life (...) with strong PQ propaganda."

      what propaganda?

      "they’re extremely happy to belt out “O Canada” with Ginette Reno."

      of course.

      "Francophones should be proud to be playing (and coaching) throughout the NHL"

      of course.

      "What a stereotypical cocooned seppie you are..."

      what streotype?

      "not a team player at all…"

      why not?!?

      "always living in the past..."


      "The PQ propaganda has been very effective on you."

      what propaganda?

    7. I can only imagine the comment @1:25 must be some sour, anonymous seppie talk repudiating the friendly use of diminutives as a term of endearment. The Habs themselves are always praising their “Pricey”. Bruins fans love their “Bergy” and “Marchy”… but leave it to seppies to take offense at everything.

  7. Montreal racist celebrating:

    "Que ce soit 10$, 50$ ou 100$, les Jeunes Patriotes du Québec ont besoin de vous! "

    Yes that is right, Ottawa isn't funding your racist stunt. Go on collect you're own money and get you're hands off my wallet. a$$holes!

    1. "Ottawa isn't funding your racist stunt."

      Wait a rotten-pickin'-minute....they were getting funding for this? From OTTAWA????

      Mmm...wonder if I can get funding for my project: Montreal ville état????

  8. Stop talking about hockey and defend our rights!

  9. Editor, I'm scratching my head to figure why Howie Meeker (a guy who used to drive me nuts, by the way) saying "They look shaky now" shows bias. I could say that the Manitoba Moose Farts are looking shaky in their game vs. the Saskatchewan Prairie Puddings, but that would be nothing more than an observation. If he'd said "We're looking shaky", that would show bias. The only way to avoid using 'they' is to constantly refer to the team by their proper name (Leafs, Red Wings, Canadiens etc.) You would never say "The Leafs better tighten up. The Leafs look shaky now", you'd say "The Leafs better tighten up. They look shaky now".

  10. "The CBC has lost the hockey rights and I couldn't be happier."
    Let's see. If you knew anything of the late Ted Rogers, you know that he was one of the worst businessmen in the history of Canada but was a member of the Toronto elite and could, as he boasted, get a gazillion $ loan though a nightime phone call to T.D.'s Dick Thompson at his home. (Shades of Jack Gallagher doing ditto for his Dome Petroleum with the Royal.) I digress. The Rogers bid for hockey rights was, as every qualified financial commentator will tell you, way, way out there. And, within days, the delighted Execus ar Rogers notified my (Cogeco with NO option in my building) cable provider of a massive increase in fees. Guess what? Cogeco had no choice but to increase my monthly rate, effective immediately. So, Canadians at CBC will be out of work in much larger numbers than Rogers plans to add as the cash-starved CBC network will lose a huge amount of essential revenue. My increased fees will be sent to NHL headquarters in New York City where it will be divvied out to all teams with extra funds to Florida, Phoenix and other money-losing U.S. teams. Net loss to Canada will be in the billions that we are all going to pay Rogers through increased cable fees, and that at a time when every team in Canada makes a profit! In addition, all that revenue sharing is tax deductible for the Canadian team owners so we lose even more. As a Canadian, a retired businessman, a taxpayer, and a no-choice-but-cable subscriber, I am NOT happy.

    1. Interesting perspective of it all, RnR!

    2. Not sure what this has to do. Ted Rogers got money from a bank not the taxpayers. Rogers made a competitive bid, they could have bid lower but where pressured by the competing taxpayer-supported CBC. Had the CBC outbid Rogers, the Canadian government would have to increase tax to support the bid, so I am quite pleased Rogers acquired the bid. The CBC played an important role in the days before cable TV, but nowadays their role is less relevant. The NHL is a private business and all the teams contribute to the NHL. Their is no tax dollar going to subsidize the NHL and frankly it should stay that way.

    3. Yes, Ted Rogers got money from a bank not the government - but both the bank and Rogers rely on the government protecting their territory from foreign competition.

      I would like to subscribe directly to and not have any games blacked out but I can't. Well, not legally...

  11. "...CBC with (...) Don Cherry cheering for the Leafs (...) it is unprofessional to the nth degree and goes against the grain of what the CBC is supposed to represent. (...) Don Cherry actually showing up to the Game Seven broadcast bedecked in a Boston Bruins jacket"

    the editor thinks canadian public television employees shouldn't wear items that promote values that are contradictory with the network's mission of neutrality.

    now swap don cherry with a dude, leafs for some religion, cbc for quebec government, game seven broadcast with a court hearing and boston bruins jacket for religious clothing.

    who would have thought that deep down the editor was a supporter of the pq's secularity charter?

    is it possible that if drainville had brought forward this hockey analogy he would have gotten the anglophones to understand something and hop aboard? or did quebec anglophones actually catch the logics and use of the charter all along, but, fearing to weaken their alliance with ultra religious ethnic groups against quebec separation, couldn't convince themselves to admit they agreed with a pq proposal?

    1. Wow. If you believe the two to be equivalent then please explain why wasn't sports attire included in the charter of values? An oversight?

      Or perhaps you are presenting yourself as a facsimlie of that confederency of dunces aka cbc sports?

    2. @josef k.

      "If you believe the two to be equivalent..."

      i don't think the two are "equivalent". i just note that the editor's point is the same as drainville's: state employees should look neutral. as far as i'm concerned, hockey clowns can wear whatever they want on cbc. i don't care. it's a game, meant to entertain. in the case of serious appointees judges and police officers the editor's argument totally applies though.

      "why wasn't sports attire included in the charter of values?"

      that's because drainville is not an imbecile.

    3. Idiotic comment. Student of what?

    4. ".... i just note that the editor's point is the same as drainville's: state employees should look neutral. as far as i'm concerned, hockey clowns can wear whatever they want on cbc. i don't care. it's a game, meant to entertain...."

      Oh brother, we are soooooo reaching, aren't we pinstripes?

      No one got behind braindrain's no-values charter because it wasn't about any charter, we saw through his deceit of trying to divide the masses. Maybe...just maybe, had he presented a real issue...and demonstrated its validity (not sure how he would have accomplished that, in this case), he'd have gotten somewhere. The charter was an excuse, a tool, for him to acoomplish something else, it was not the mission like it should have been. Put it to rest already, your precious PQ acted in-bad-faith, and paid the PRICE. (Go Habs Go).

      Next time come to the table with something concrete we can ALL get behind....otherwise, fiche-nous la paix.

    5. "that's because drainville is not an imbecile."

      That's right he's not....he's a BIG imbecile!
      You hold on to him ya' hear! He's terrific for your cause, and spectacular for

    6. @ Student

      "... or did quebec anglophones actually catch the logics and use of the charter all along, but, fearing to weaken their alliance with ultra religious ethnic groups against quebec separation."

      As always, what Anglophones it would weaken is their alliegiance to Canada. One issue in an election campaign is not enough to get people to make that big a change in their lives.

      You still haven't given one reason why an independent Quebec would be a better place for Anglophones to live than Canada.

    7. A better comparison would be showing up to court and the judge was wearing a go defendant go T-shirt. Give it a rest student, the charter is dead, no one really cared about it enough to vote for it and trying to rationalise your support for it as being something above and beyond you not thinking religious people are competent or trustworthy is starting to get sad.

    8. @jay

      "As always, what Anglophones (fear) it would weaken is their alliegiance to Canada."

      from this acknowledgement we can easily come up with an answer to your other concern. if quebec was an independant country montreal anglophones could finally speak their minds freely without fearing of weakening any shaky federalist alliance. i am sure many montreal anglophones, complicated being one of them, would love to support the secularity charter but can't for fear of giving the pq any support at all. that would be a huge reason why quebec would be a better place for anglophones if it was a separate country in my humble opinion. they would end up with more than one political party to vote for! don't you think this would be better for quebec anglophones?

    9. @whowhatzit

      "A better comparison would be showing up to court and the judge was wearing a go defendant go T-shirt."

      and? would this be wrong? should i understand that you think a judge should look neutral?

    10. In relation to the case in front of them of course, if the judge high fives the defendant on the way in, there might be a conflict of interest. Though again here I don't see how that relates to religious symbols unless you mean to imply perhaps the judge is visibly muslim so they might side with a muslim defendant? Of course using this idiotic logic if they were both women that would not be "neutral" perhaps if they both had brown hair or came from the same town, that again would not be neutral. Are you suggesting we cover all people in a trial in burkas so that no one knows their age gender sex or physical characteristics? I guess it's the only way to be sure to keep everyone "neutral" lmao. Though removing the symbol would not stop the person from being a muslim and engaging in this imaginary non-neutrality you've concocted in your mind, so once again your dead charter is still inane and displays your underlying discrimination.

      The one person whose advice I wouldn't take on banning religious symbols is someone who professes to think religious people are inherently unable to be trusted to do their jobs.

    11. hey Student, do you not understand the difference between having a professional dress code and making that dress code the law of the land?

      Further as to why anglophones don't vote for the PQ, have you considered that maybe it is because the PQ presents Anglophones as an threat to motivate their base that the French language is under perpetual threat? Just as the Republican party uses Afro-Americans to motivate their base via fear the PQ uses the Anglophone minority. Guess what? Afro-Americans don't much like the Republican party either.

    12. @josef

      " you not understand the difference between having a professional dress code and making that dress code the law of the land?"

      what i understand is the editor thinks don cherry should look neutral because he's a canadian public television employee. same reasoning as drainville.

      "have you considered that maybe it is because the PQ presents Anglophones as an threat to motivate their base that the French language is under perpetual threat?"

      no. that's the way your puppet masters put it to make you perceive the pq as some sort of enemy. the truth is the pq presents north american english culture, as a threat to the survival of french culture in north america. sheer numbers. it's nothing personal mate. you should also fight to preserve french culture. diversity is great.

      "PQ uses the Anglophone minority."

      totally false. it uses the overhelming anglophone majority. 400 to 6.

    13. @whowhatzit

      "Though removing the symbol would not stop the person from being a muslim and engaging in this imaginary non-neutrality you've concocted in your mind,..."

      right, so you didn't feel like replying to the editor's post then? seems like you don't agree at all with him today mate.

    14. diversity is great.

      So now you support diversity in Quebec (e.g. allowing non-French signs that actually represent the real Quebec). You are definitely one very confused dude, mate. The propaganda is strong in you.

      There’s far more diversity in North America than there is in Quebec. You should tell that to your puppet masters.

    15. @marty sl

      "So now you support diversity in Quebec..."

      i always did.

      "allowing non-French signs that actually represent the real Quebec"

      they are allowed. they just need to include a french translation in order to represent the real quebec. why do you bring this up mate? is this a problem?!?

      "There’s far more diversity in North America than there is in Quebec."

      no true. all of north america is english. quebec is french. that's diverse.

    16. "The one person whose advice I wouldn't take on banning religious symbols is someone who professes to think religious people are inherently unable to be trusted to do their jobs."

      ah. well for my part i question the judgement skills of a dude who believes the universe was created in a week by "god". don't you?

    17. @whowhatzit

      previous comment was addrees to you of course. anyone who also doesn't see a problem with his trial being presided by a burqa clad dude is also welcome to react.

    18. Yeesh, it took you two hours to come up with those two rambling posts? Desperation they name is student. Though I fail to see how ones' dress code or ones' opinion on the creation of the universe would impact enforcing the law, or negate years of law school experience and acceptance by both the government and the professional bar association, then again I'm not paranoid with a chip on my shoulder.

      Here I'll illustrate how antiquated what you're saying is by changing two words "anyone who also doesn't see a problem with his trial being presided by a black dude is also welcome to react.", this ain't the south in the 1920s, please join the rest of us in the more civilized present.

    19. Quebec outside Montreal is hardly diverse.

      Pity you haven’t been to New Mexico. It might open your eyes just a little.

    20. @whowhatzit

      bad comment mate. judging a dude over his belief system is not the same as judging a dude over his skin colour. your attempt at smearing me is pityful. you're not fooling anyone relevant mate.


      "Quebec outside Montreal is hardly diverse."

      wrong, it's french. quebec french. a unique culture. like nowhere else mate. very diverse. you don't even get it in new mexico (???).

    21. *Facepalm*

      You don't understand the meaning of diverse, I see. When everybody is white, franco and Catholic, that's not diverse. Are you beginning to understand it, now, dingleberry?

    22. Oh trust me student I need not try and smear you, your own words do that so much better than anyone trying to do so.

      The example I gave is exceedingly apt, as what you're doing to this fictional judge is the same as was done in the deep south, both sad and reprehensible mind you. When you denigrate someone over them wearing religious symbols you are making assumptions as to what they believe, what they think, or how they will act based solely on their physical appearance, ie discrimination based on what they look like. You have no idea what someone's actual beliefs are without them telling you, and you certainly can't know based on what they look like, and yet you persist. Then in your second form of discrimination, you assume that anyone who is religious cannot separate their beliefs from enforcing the law that they've learnt and trained how to follow over decades. Again totally baseless, and again 100% based on you perceiving them, based on what they look like, to be incompetent, shameful really.

      I'm not sure why you continue to want to debate the merits of the charter, you inevitably lose the debate every single time because at it's core the only reason you support the charter is because you cannot abide by religious people, and as such, you support measures to discriminate against them based on this. Poor form indeed.

      Again I invite you to join the rest of us in this century and stop discriminating against people you don't know based on what they look like and the hypothetical untestable beliefs they hold; there's no way to know if there's a god, but there is a 100% certainty that taking a religious symbol off a religious person won't make them any less religious. As such doing so really only reeks of pettiness on your part.

    23. @heisenberg

      "When everybody is white, franco and Catholic, that's not diverse."

      right. does your view of diversity imply there is none in the chinese quarter, none in cote st-luc, and none in st-leonard? does it imply that all diversity is great except the french canadian one? you sound racist.

    24. @whowhatzit

      Please don't invite this troll anywhere, let alone to this century. Let's leave her in the quebec backwaters, where, after all she living. Her insistence defending a broke-ass quebec brand has gotten so bloody old. The fact that she beats a dead horse day in and day out is the clearest indication her broke-ass brand is indefensible and yet she persists. She should stay in the bush. Not everyone deserves indoor plumbing, lololol.

    25. Perhaps we could just send student to the very end of the last century. It would make student less bigoted, we wouldn't have to deal with backwards thinking as student is 15 years in the past, and student could live in a world where the PQ, the charter and separation aren't effectively dead, I mean student lives in that fantasy world anyway but at least being back then student would sound a bit less out of touch, if only slightly so.

      Student really needs to look at a map if his argument for there being diversity in Quebec outside of Montreal is that there is diversity in Cote st-luc, the chinese quarter and st-leonard, all of which are locations within Montreal, lmao too great. Student also doesn't seem to understand that diversity means a number of different ethno-cultural groups within the same area, not a homogeneous group in the same area so long as they aren't English, no student Japan isn't diverse because they're not white anglo-saxons, it's a fairly homogeneous country lmao.

    26. Damn - I'm so sick of reading how "unique", "cultural" and "precious" the francophones are compared to EVERYONE ELSE ON THIS PLANET! If student is an example (and I'm sure she is) of just how "wonderful" their "culture" is, compared to the rest of us, this GD planet doesn't stand a chance of surviving the next 50 years! We can all just kill one another to show who is "superior" and "unique" until we wipe each other out. Separatist thinking at it's very best and they wonder why they are hated so much. Give it a rest stupdent - we're totally fed up with the lot of you and so is the rest of the world. Go suck your thumb in the corner and sulk until you grow to f--- up. Spoiled selfish incompetent separatists.

    27. @cutie003

      french canandian culture being precious and unique doesn't take anything away from your culture cutie003, if you have one. no one ever claimed "superiority". seemingly there still are some basic concepts that you don't understand mate. or concepts you need to tweak in order to be able to make a point against people you hate.

    28. Passing laws dictating that French must be twice as big as any other language on commercial signs, regardless of the makeup of the local population, is a clear example of francos claiming superiority. Intimidating small businesses with government-sanctioned oppression is another clear example of francos claiming superiority.

      Nobody else in the world would think of passing such a law because it’s embarrassing and shameful. This is a very basic concept to understand, even for sour, hateful seppies.

    29. @sinope

      "...regardless of the makeup of the local population,..."

      the local population is 80%+ francophone. it's a four to one ratio, do you think this would be a better directive for lettering size?

      "Intimidating small businesses..."

      i don't believe that quebec small businesses who obey the quebec laws are bothered.


      haha! you're using words that are too big for you mate.

      "Nobody else in the world would think of passing such a law..."

      crazytalk. there are language laws all over the world. you need to go out more.

    30. Student Logic: We need language laws to defend French because it's a minority language! Requiring French be larger is perfectly justified because French is the majority language! lmao

      I guess we're off the charter and diversity topics now? Well keep on cycling topics student, perhaps you'll find something you can put up at least a weak defence for, though I'm doubtful. I know the PQ PR department is a tad busy right now, following their crushing defeat, so they can't feed you new nonsensical things to spew, but you can't keep repeating the same material, it still doesn't make sense on top of that now it's also really stale.

  12. When I see Don Cherry in his Bruins regalia on Hockey Night in Canada, I always wonder how the CBC would react if Chantal Hébert or Andrew Coyne showed up for the National's political panel while wearing a whacking big Liberal (or Conservative or NDP or Green Party) badge on their lapel. I suspect it wouldn't be allowed.
    I am not a Don Cherry hater, but I wouldn't be unhappy if Rogers unloaded him when it takes over NHL broadcasts next year. His act is stale, and it doesn't matter if his ties promote the Bruins or the Winnipeg Jets or the Phoenix Coyotes. Sports analysts should not have rootng interests, petiod.

    1. Sorry for the typos. Last line should read: "Sports analysts should not have rooting interests, period." Thank you.

  13. Greedy government a$$holes

    "la perte de son permis d'organisation de bingos"

    Great idea, deprive a needed charity of their revenue. What about breakfast for needy kids? Who will be deliver the program now? A unionized government employee! Great idea!

  14. While I agree with this post that the CBC is way too much Toronto-centric, and therefore the HNIC is tilted too much to the Leafs, to be fair I need to see from another angle.

    What about hockey in French language broadcasting? Currently the only channel that does it seriously is only the RDS. TVA Sports does do limited NHL broadcast, but I still can not consider them seriously. Look at RDS coverage. It is nothing but the Canadiens. From top to bottom RDS is built around the Canadiens, everything else is just gravy.

    The problem is that RDS is supposedly a national sports channel. Its CRTC licence is as national specialty channel, not a regional one. That is why RDS is must-carry all across Canada. That means that cable and satellite providers in Canada must have RDS in their lineup for customers to choose for. Now, how is it fair that a national channel is very much tilted towards just one team?

    1. It's not easy being a Habs fan smack-dab in the middle of Leafs Nation!

    2. There's a Leads Nation ..still? Lol

    3. Mississauga,

      Au contraire mon ami, I am having a blast being a Canadien fan in Toronto. Just looking at the dirty looks my colleagues give me when I wear the sweater during game days... priceless!

    4. @Troy

      In defense of RDS, the Montreal Canadiens are the only NHL team that plays in a city where most of the residents are francophones. I think that plays a big factor. Now if enough francophones in western Quebec around Gatineau were to complain about the network not covering the Sens, they may broaden their coverage. I suspect they are responding to demand from French-Canadian hockey fans, who are overwhelmingly Habs fans.

    5. Mr. Cunningham,

      There is a saying "What is good for the goose is good for the gander". Therefore, if the language of the broadcaster is a factor and you think that RDS is justified in leaning towards "the only NHL team that plays in a city where most of the residents are francophones," even though their licence is a national channel, would you not think that CBC, an English broadcaster, is also justified to lean against "the only NHL team that plays in a city where most of the residents are not anglophones"?

  15. warning, the following link does not lead to your favourite emotive quebec bashing national post wacky columnist.

    a good read, but only if you care about facts. cutie003, montreal ville état, apple iigs and durham should avoid. you won't like it as it's negative and about dear lpq mna julie boulet.

    1. Her memory is about as good as Drainville's on whether he actually got a legal opinion lmao, must be something in the water.

    2. UN GARS BIEN SYMPATHIQUE DE FRANKFORTMonday, May 19, 2014 at 4:27:00 PM EDT

      Where's your buddy S.R.? After a PQ loss did he lose his job?

    3. Considering Quebec is only second to Newfoundland in how much people donate to political parties, and parties receive money based on the amount of vote they get, and the PQ wasn't in power long enough to get very many kickbacks, they must be hurting for money, can't keep all the cronies employed in hard times.

    4. That should read "Quebec is only second to Newfoundland in how little they donate."

  16. "Le Canadien doit se mettre en mode Julie Boulet et tout oublier. #GoHabsGo"

  17. As an American who still remembers the Olympics a few months ago, I find it ironic to see Canadians complaining about how badly the CBC was broadcasting the Stanley Cup and wishing they could watch the NBC Sports Network instead. If we let you guys watch NBC Sports Network, could we watch CBC during the next Olympics?

  18. I haven't heard of a single person wishing for NBCSN. CBC was fine (except for Cherry). Where did you get that impression?

    1. I got this from the Editor who said, "The worst in all this is that we are forced to endure the amateur bumpkins at the CBC because of blackouts of the very professional NBC Sports alternate coverage."

      P.S. If you want to reply to my post, use the reply option---don't make a new entry.

    2. I agree with you, Keep Calm. Except for Don Cherry's stupidities -- ("Lucic knows he made a mistake in the handshake line. ..." Sure, which is why Lucy has insisted he won't apologize for his behaviour) -- Hockey Night in Canada still does a pretty good job broadcasting hockey, IMHO. The only Canadians I know who exalt NBCSN/NBC's coverage are at TSN690 radio, especially that Mitch Melnick character, whose man-crush on Pierre McGuire borders on the creepy, and whose disdain for the CBC borders on phobic. Maybe the CBC never responded when Melnick sent in his résumé.
      McGuire is an excellent analyst, but he was poached from TSN. NBC play-by-play man Mike Emrick is praised by American media people as a great announcer, but his supporters seem never to have watched a Canadian hockey broadcast; compared with Danny gallivan or even Jim Hughson or Gord Miller, Emrick's not that good.
      For Game 1 of the Rangers-Canadiens series, I put two TVs side by side and watched the NBC and CBC feeds at once. Guess what: On NBC, almost every pause in the action was filled by a close-up of the Rangers bench or a quick featurette on a Rangers player. There was one shot of Carey Price with some stats superimposed, but generally, the Canadiens were an afterthought on NBC. Oh, yes: NBC also ran commercials during the anthems, thereby depriving the US audience of a chance to see how hockey is revered in Montreal.
      One more thing: the CBC has Cherry, while NBC has Mike Milbury. Talk about Mutually Assured Dimbulb-ery
      NBC is an American network. It is never in their interest to see a Canadian NHL team succeed. Always remember that when someone pines to watch NBC's coverage. It's irritatingly pro-U.S. team and always has been.

    3. I did click on reply (same as I'm doing now), Edward, but when replying to the bottom-most comment, Blogger sometimes decides to turn it into a new comment rather than a reply regardless of what you clicked. It's one of the many bugs with this antique interface. Let's see if it behaves this time.

    4. @Keep Calm

      And it DID happen to me as well. Sorry about that...

  19. The “Good game” T-shirt made the rounds on Twitter pretty quickly. Very funny. I didn’t realize that NHL players were mic’ed up, though. You can listen to Danny Brière’s classy handshake line talk here:

    This one’s not as good but it records Brière’s goal in Game 7 as it sounds on the ice:

    I can’t imagine why LOOCH’s handshake line chatter hasn’t appeared on Youtube!

  20. @Keep Calm and Carey On

    Thanks. If Blogger does the same thing to me and this becomes a new post as well, then I hope you accept my apologies.

  21. Not looking good for the Habs. Long way back now and next two are in Rangerville.

    I am sure the Golf courses are well groomed in Montreal :)

    1. Hark! Is this an anti-Habs fan I'm reading?

      Sadly, you're not far off. Seems that Kreider character can put Carey out of business, but dare a Hab THINK of putting Lundqvist out of business and he'll get the Wrath of Bettman, the American defender of team owners who gives Canada barely a second thought.

    2. Mississauga,

      While it is true that without Price the Habs chance is practically non-existent, look at their offense. Game I, 2 goals. Game II, 1 goal. With or without Price, do they really expect to win game II with only ONE goal? As good as Price is, he can not score.

    3. Billy Smith from the Islanders scored a couple I believe. During final minutes of game when the opposing team pulled the Goaltender. Not likely to happen with the HABS as you indicate. They have to learn to shoot the puck "straight".

    4. Well, I do not mean the extraordinary situation of scoring an empty net. Martin Brodeur has 3 goals in his name. I just mean that with Price or not, the offense is not good, and they can not win series with that kind of offense.

  22. Never been a HAB's fan although I would have liked to see the young guy from Watson SK make a bit better showing. Not that he played badly stopping 27 shots. Lundquist just played better with 40 saves I think.

    1. What a dumb comment. “King” Henrik Lundqvist is one of the top goalies in the entire NHL, with years of NHL experience, while 24-year-old Dustin Tokarski was making his NHL playoff debut on Monday. He performed most admirably, by any measure. Even Carey Price would have been sweating playing against Lundqvist. And you just admitted that the Habs did better than the Rangers by having more shots on goal.

      Granted, we’re probably toast now (and you know, for the first time since 1973, we were the only Canadian team to have qualified for the playoffs this year).

      Why don’t you just come out and tell us why you have this chip on your shoulder against us?


  23. Tony Tomassi just plead guilty.

    He must have gotten assurances from the Liberals that he held out long enough, they will reward him with no fine or penalty. Like all Quebec criminals he'll be back on the streets and in the construction business in no time.

    Liberal, PQ or just straight up Mafia. Quebec legal system and culture is no match.

  24. The Oqlf lost the fight against the big boys so they're back to harassing the little guys.

    "Montreal bar and barbershop Blue Dog Motel has been named as such for more than 20 years, and so owner Raphael Kerwin was surprised to receive a letter this month from the Office québécois de la langue française telling him he had to modify its name."

    1. Beating up on small business provides socialist francophones with their kicks and jollies.

      Restaurants are the perfect victim for francophones in govt to beat up on. It's not like they are exporting products and can move to Ontario and keep the same clients.

      Nothing gives a boost of self confidence to "Les Quebecois" like kicking an anglophone or immigrant and making their life harder.

      These burocrats *LIVE* for this.

      The OLQF unlike all the other branches of Quebecois govt have not figured a way to embezzle or outright steal as much as the other departments.

    2. The OQLF backed off again and closed the file this afternoon, using as an excuse either that “too much time” had passed between the inspection and the letter (according to OQLF flunkie who was interviewed on the CBC Montreal radio show “Homerun” today) or that there was a “misunderstanding” (according to this CBC Montreal news report) because they were requesting a French descriptor that was already there.

  25. A handful of Quebec separatists stay classy (NOT!) in the face of divergent opinion, even ripping the Canadian flag (something that no Scotsman would ever dare to do with the Union Jack). What trashy people, unable to debate with opponents respectfully. It’s very sad to see people who have succumbed to strong PQ propaganda, which has in turn created sour, angry people who are still living in centuries past.

    1. Pitiful comes to mind, but it's an understatement. Tearing the Maple Leaf says it all, so cheap, so undignified.
      You are correct Cat, ....these unfortunate souls still live in centuries old.

      Q: Isn't it unhealthy to live in the past, especially that of ancestors?

      (Oh and...the guy with the horn has to go). Lol

  26. Why do they use biased announcers during the playoffs ? They sure don't like the Habs !