Totally agree Boyle could've handled it differently, but if you have a giant soapbox with which to skewer people in print, don't get upset when they skewer you back
The Following User Says Thank You to Street Pharmacist For This Useful Post:
Is that all they said? Really? Sorry, but Boyle has to grow a thicker skin. You're a professional athlete. People are going to criticize you in public. That's part of the whole deal that goes with all that money - public scrutiny and public criticism. All these reporters did was comment that Boyle was no longer an especially good player. And guess what - he's not. They didn't take personal shots at him.
I really hope when professional sports journalists are replaced by accredited, amateur bloggers (and it's coming), we don't just get fawning fanboy coverage. Pro athletes are already spoiled and cosseted enough.
Why would you think that's all they wrote?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Erick Estrada
I like Boyle but I find the admiration of his act here strange seeing Torts got trashed for doing the same thing with Brooks.
Trashed by who? I remember everyone supporting him because brooks is trash.
So would the people defending Boyle feel the same if Eberle tore a strip off Hrudey for the comments he made a few weeks ago about Eberle's slack play? Maybe walked up when Hrudey was doing After Hours and told him to go f*** himself?
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by fotze
If this day gets you riled up, you obviously aren't numb to the disappointment yet to be a real fan.
The Following User Says Thank You to CliffFletcher For This Useful Post:
Hrudey doesn't have a long history of being a ####ty journalist and a dbag.
Again. What exactly did Brooks write that warranted this reaction? I'm honestly asking. I get that people don't like Brooks but I have yet to see what he wrote that made this an appropriate response.
Has anyone here been abruptly eliminated from the Stanley Cup playoffs, only to face the fact that their career in the NHL may have come to an end at the same time? I'm guessing Boyle was experiencing a high level of stress and a lot of raw emotion at the time. Composing himself and being totally professional might have been difficult at the time.
Again. What exactly did Brooks write that warranted this reaction? I'm honestly asking. I get that people don't like Brooks but I have yet to see what he wrote that made this an appropriate response.
Honestly I have no idea either. But I've read enough of Brooks' crap to know that I support Boyle regardless of what was written. I legitimately think Brooks is an ####### and I support any player or coach that tells him to #### off. I didn't mean it to sound like I was appalled with Boyles treatment. He probably deserves some criticism. No player is above that. Again though, Brooks is a dick and I like seeing dicks get yelled at.
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Cecil Terwilliger For This Useful Post:
So would the people defending Boyle feel the same if Eberle tore a strip off Hrudey for the comments he made a few weeks ago about Eberle's slack play? Maybe walked up when Hrudey was doing After Hours and told him to go f*** himself?
I'm not taking sides here. But your "what if" scenario is entirely different than what happened. Boyle didn't go after Brooks. Boyle is trying to get changed and looks up and sees Brooks in his space.
Also sounded like we miss what started it all. Almost as if Brooks was trying to get Boyle to throw some of his teammates under the bus? Not entirely sure, need more context.
Honestly I have no idea either. But I've read enough of Brooks' crap to know that I support Boyle regardless of what was written. I legitimately think Brooks is an ####### and I support any player or coach that tells him to #### off. I didn't mean it to sound like I was appalled with Boyles treatment. He probably deserves some criticism. No player is above that. Again though, Brooks is a dick and I like seeing dicks get yelled at.
Brooks is an idiot, but to support Boyle with no idea of what Brooks wrote or didn't write isn't fair.
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to JiriHrdina For This Useful Post:
So would the people defending Boyle feel the same if Eberle tore a strip off Hrudey for the comments he made a few weeks ago about Eberle's slack play? Maybe walked up when Hrudey was doing After Hours and told him to go f*** himself?
I'm not a Larry Brooks expert but any article I read from him is usually sarcastic, dismissive, pessimistic and uncomplimentry to any Ranger players he talks about. After a while, a year, maybe two that starts to wear on you and you snap back.
Is it acceptable? Probably not, but it's understandable.
Would I be upset if someone snapped at Kelly Hrudey? Probably. Eric Francis? Probably not.
Last edited by MrMastodonFarm; 04-26-2016 at 10:58 PM.
The Following 7 Users Say Thank You to MrMastodonFarm For This Useful Post:
The funniest part is when he looks around like he's about to say "security!" Then says " don't I have that right?"Uhhh pretty sure you don't have the right to kick somebody out of the locker room because you don't like his reporting.
I think another important thing to note here is this all appears to take place before a scrum. I'm not sure Boyle knew he was being filmed at the time. This is like the Joe Thornton "4 goals" comment from a few years ago. I doubt he expected it to get out.
Not the sort of behaviour a team should condone, but given Boyle is likely retiring there's not much that can be done save remind active players this won't fly. Columnists like Brooks, who are paid (and read) for their opinions shouldn't be immune to criticism for what they write but this kind of treatment goes too far.
I don't often read Brooks, but there's certainly plenty of room in the media landscape for diverse and even divisive opinions. If he thinks Boyle is garbage, he has the right to say so (hopefully with a bit of reasoning to back up the opinion). It'd be boring otherwise.
Brooks is an idiot, but to support Boyle with no idea of what Brooks wrote or didn't write isn't fair.
Do you read Brooks' articles? It's not about a quote. He is subversive. Has a subtle vicious undertone. And writes in a way to just poke nerves that is click bait in its own way. EVERY article seems to have it. Tough for the target not to eventually take it personally.
Why can't Boyle confront him? Boyle looks bad for not handling better and swearing, but that's how he felt. He's not a lawyer. He's a player.
As for swearing at work. Try working on a trading floor.
It's funny....those defending Brooks are those with some connection to the media.
The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to dustygoon For This Useful Post:
I look at it Brooks as being similar to Eric Francis.
He's a smarmy know-it-all who makes his living being a contrived pessimist looking to cut down any athlete he can to seek attention through controversy.
I don't need a list of things he said that were out of line to know he had that coming.
Would be the same thing if a member of the Flames lost it on Francis after a big loss at the end of the season. Tit for tat, and par for the course.
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to GoJetsGo For This Useful Post:
