Thank you Scotty! I can say some radio hosts like to dine and dash. You get to speak once, then you’re gone. You wait and wait on hold and then you can’t back up your points? A bit frustrating. This is why I appreciate how Scott was this morning. I appreciate having a chance to say what I needed to say. Thanks!
I was on air discussion the Canuck goalie situation in the playoffs. I heard Botchford heap on the praise of Luongo. Believe me I’ve heard too much about how great Luongo is lately. Sorry folks, I don’t agree. I agree he can make the hard save, but he will have a lapse and let in a bad goal in almost any game where there is a pressure point. I argue that those soft goals kill the team in front of him. I argue that making a hard save is great, but letting in a soft goal erases all the hard saves. As a teammate, a goal on a hard shot would be easier to deal with than seeing a softy go in. Unfortunately Luongo, since the finals last year, has lost that aura or ability to get in the heads of the opposition.
Scotty countered a few of my points, which is great. I argued Luongo lost the Anaheim series a while back. Remember he was busy pointing at the ref and the shot from the blue line beat him. Scotty suggested we weren’t going to win the series. Well, thanks to Luongo, yes it’s on him, that puck beat him and the game ended. Take the olympics. I argued Luongo let in the late goal. Scotty argued that Luongo still won the gold. Sure he did. But it was in spite of his goal tending and not because of his goal tending that we won the gold. I argued about last year finals and game 7. The softy through his legs? Killed the Canuck emotionally because they knew after that they had to make 2 against Thomas. If that was a good goal I’m sure the players on the Canucks wouldn’t have felt so down afterwards.
In closing, I say call a Vancouver talk radio show and voice an opinion. Just jot down a couple notes and make sure you make your point. You may not get a second chance to say anything.