# Don cherry-why is he so popular?



## Steadfastly (Nov 14, 2008)

Why do you think Don Cherry is so popular?


----------



## Mooh (Mar 7, 2007)

His suits? His vocabulary? His outspoken opinions? 

He's sure made a lot of being a Bruins coach. Anyone could have coached that team to greatness...Orr, Esposito, et al. Coach's Corner is kinda like a second rate SNL skit. 

Ron MacLean however, is a national treasure. Has he got the Order Of Canada yet?

Peace, Mooh.


----------



## Robert1950 (Jan 21, 2006)

I have never been able to figure that out.


----------



## Milkman (Feb 2, 2006)

He's popular because he says what many hockey fans want to hear.

Personally I'm not a fan. I think Ron MacLean makes him look and sound like a hillbilly.

Why is he so popular? Take a poll asking how many people think fighting is a "part of the game" and should be allowed, or ask whether they enjoy the fighting.

There will be your answer.


----------



## Perkinsfan (Oct 17, 2007)

Robert1950 said:


> I have never been able to figure that out.


+1! 
I just don't understand his popularity either.


----------



## simescan (May 15, 2007)

He dresses like a baffoon and apparently,......people like that???


----------



## screamingdaisy (Oct 14, 2008)

Because he carries on like a loud, boisterous hockey fan, rather than some slick talking head announcer.


----------



## Guest (Nov 29, 2008)

Ron James had this awesome sketch where he said we'd all still be listening to Cherry when he's 102 and not just a little incomprehensible but totally incomprehensible. Something like: Ahh yea ymmm meeeehh ffeee aahhh..._Dougie Gilmour!_...memeeeee...hehehe fuuu ya, ya, ya...._LEAFS!_...meh, geee gee ohh myyy...._Kingston Boy!_....

I think I peed a little laughing at that one. Can't find it on YouTube unfortunately....at least not just that bit of the show.


----------



## smorgdonkey (Jun 23, 2008)

I think he's popular because he's a regular Joe and people like the contrast between him and the typical hockey commentator...I think they like the contrast between he and Ron M too. Ron is the perfect straight to Don's wild card. 

I still recall having a hard time getting used to Ron after Dave got the axe though. It's tough to remember exactly why but Ron's like old slippers now.

Speaking of national treasures...


iaresee said:


> Ron James had this awesome sketch


...I don't think I heard that one but every one I have ever heard was incredibly funny...the first big special that I saw on TV when the main part of the story is about him going to live in Hollywood to try to get a sitcom going. Priceless!! So many laughs!


----------



## SG-Rocker (Dec 30, 2007)

rant/

Don Cherry is a lame old has-been ... 

I myself don't care for hockey or any other pro sport for that matter. Perhaps it was my George Carlin education but I see pro sports fans as sheep. 

How do we find entertainment in watching millionaires do what children will happily do for free ?

That man is the epitome of ignorance and intolerance. I'm think tongue or colon cancer would be poetic justice. Most people I know who love him do so merely cause he's been around sooo long, they figure he must be important.

I suppose if something/someone is shoved down your throat long enough you eventually embrace it.

/rant


----------



## The Kicker Of Elves (Jul 20, 2006)

SG-Rocker said:


> generalize/
> 
> Don Cherry is a lame old has-been ...
> 
> ...


There fixed it for you.


----------



## peter benn (Mar 29, 2007)

Allegorical or quasi-allegorical surnames can be a happy circumstance in public life: "Grapes." Ideally you want the implicit parts of your image to match the quasi-allegory that exists behind the mention of your name.

Just conjecture.


----------



## SG-Rocker (Dec 30, 2007)

peter benn said:


> Allegorical or quasi-allegorical surnames can be a happy circumstance in public life: "Grapes." Ideally you want the implicit parts of your image to match the quasi-allegory that exists behind the mention of your name.
> 
> Just conjecture.





WTF are you talking about ?

Rest assured if you have me scratching my head then 'puck heads' (hockey fans) have gone catatonic reading this.


----------



## Geek (Jun 5, 2007)

Heh, I like the guy because he can't be broken in and domesticated by the PC wuss crowd


----------



## zontar (Oct 25, 2007)

I think part of it is that people find him entertaining.
And that's what he's there for--entertainment.
I don't look to him for any profound insight.
I look to him for entertainment.

It doesn't matter if I agree with him or not, but whether he's entertaining.

People can say things I agree with in a non-entertaining way.
People can say things I disagree with in an entertaining way.


----------



## fraser (Feb 24, 2007)

he makes his living saying things on tv that canadians can relate too. 
we dont like european players, we like fighting, we dont like touch icing etc.
nobody else is allowed to say this stuff.he says what we all feel but are unable to change- old school hockey is the best- **** all this fancy skating and unpronouncable names.
dude dresses like a gay peacock tho- and hes a bigmouth. he does that for the kids i guess. kids watch wrestling- theyre stupid.
lately he makes a point of showing all of wade belaks fights lol- then says no, we cant have a guy like that on our team, better trade him lol- i love that


----------



## allthumbs56 (Jul 24, 2006)

Don Cherry IS Sam the Snowman....


----------



## Milkman (Feb 2, 2006)

fraser said:


> he makes his living saying things on tv that canadians can relate too.
> we dont like european players, we like fighting, we dont like touch icing etc.
> nobody else is allowed to say this stuff.he says what we all feel but are unable to change- old school hockey is the best- **** all this fancy skating and unpronouncable names.
> dude dresses like a gay peacock tho- and hes a bigmouth. he does that for the kids i guess. kids watch wrestling- theyre stupid.
> lately he makes a point of showing all of wade belaks fights lol- then says no, we cant have a guy like that on our team, better trade him lol- i love that


As a Canadian, I have to clarify that you don't speak for all of us when you say "we dont like european players, we like fighting, we dont like touch icing etc.".


I completely disagree with all of that. Just my opinion of course, and it supports my previous post. If you like the violence in hockey, you'll probably like Cherry. If you find anti European and anti French rants entertaining, again you'll be more likely to enjoy Cherry.


----------



## Starbuck (Jun 15, 2007)

People love Don Cherry cause in a world where you have to be SO careful to not offend anyone, he could care less and his bit is to be completely unpolitically correct.


----------



## smorgdonkey (Jun 23, 2008)

SG-Rocker said:


> I'm think tongue or colon cancer would be poetic justice.


Wishing illness/disease upon anyone is quite a display of 


SG-Rocker said:


> intolerance


and quite a display of 


SG-Rocker said:


> ignorance


in this case considering that in Cherry's case he has always taken the time to help as many sick children as possible.

Seriously...with that much hatred, can't you direct it toward 50 Cent or someone who deserves it?


----------



## Robert1950 (Jan 21, 2006)

I thought that anyone who isn't a hardcore puckhead, who likes watching him, was because they like seeing someone make a grand ass of himself.


----------



## SG-Rocker (Dec 30, 2007)

OK maybe I hated a little hard on ol Grapes. 

I just find most sports figureheads to be neandertholic (sp?) morons. 

I like to think the Don Cherry et al validate Darwin's theory of evolution.

If you think my opinion of Cherry is harsh, don't even get me started on hip-hop.....


----------



## fraser (Feb 24, 2007)

Milkman said:


> As a Canadian, I have to clarify that you don't speak for all of us when you say "we dont like european players, we like fighting, we dont like touch icing etc.".
> 
> 
> I completely disagree with all of that. Just my opinion of course, and it supports my previous post. If you like the violence in hockey, you'll probably like Cherry. If you find anti European and anti French rants entertaining, again you'll be more likely to enjoy Cherry.


MM- just to clarify my position, 
in actuality, tho i never miss hockey night in canada, i never watch the cherry segment. although i agree with many of his views, he is insufferably bizarre.
in any case,for many of us, its not about fighting, or europeans(i myself am european) or the french(they had as much to do with hockey as anybody)
its about preserving the game we grew up with. i dont watch hockey to see violence- but if you removed the violence, itd be a different game- likely a boring one.
but heres the thing- i only watch the leafs. i watch all the games, but follow no other games or the teams involved-no interest in them, and its good, because i dont have the time to watch hockey every night.
the leafs are a wimpy team full of europeans. why would i not follow chicago, a team made up of almost all canadian players? cant answer that. but there it is. sometimes things just dont make sense.


----------



## Steadfastly (Nov 14, 2008)

Don was in fine form Saturday night and so were the Leafs.


----------



## Milkman (Feb 2, 2006)

fraser said:


> MM- just to clarify my position,
> in actuality, tho i never miss hockey night in canada, i never watch the cherry segment. although i agree with many of his views, he is insufferably bizarre.
> in any case,for many of us, its not about fighting, or europeans(i myself am european) or the french(they had as much to do with hockey as anybody)
> its about preserving the game we grew up with. i dont watch hockey to see violence- but if you removed the violence, itd be a different game- likely a boring one.
> ...


There are more and more Canadians who don't think Hockey would be diminished if fighting was drastically reduced or eliminated. I'm one of them.

The hockey I enjoy the most is Olympic hockey and to tell the truth, WOMEN'S Olympic hockey.

Yes it would be a different game, one with more dignity and sportsmanship, one that we could use as an example for our kids.

But those as always are just my opinions.

Nothing wrong with a good solid check. A punch in the face is assault.


----------



## screamingdaisy (Oct 14, 2008)

Milkman said:


> There are more and more Canadians who don't think Hockey would be diminished if fighting was drastically reduced or eliminated. I'm one of them.


Every reader poll I've ever read says otherwise.



> The hockey I enjoy the most is Olympic hockey and to tell the truth, WOMEN'S Olympic hockey.


If you watch an international tournament, European games are good. However, if there winds up being a Canada/US game the intensity jumps tenfold. The North American version of hockey isn't the same game that they play across the pond. It's why most of the European teams get steamrolled, even when we play by their rules.



> Yes it would be a different game, one with more dignity and sportsmanship, one that we could use as an example for our kids.


In my experience there's more unsportsmanlike conduct in non-contact hockey than there is in full contact hockey. Hockey is too fast and too dynamic a game to rely on the ref/linesman to take care of you, even in leagues where they've attempted to remove the most violent aspects.



> Nothing wrong with a good solid check. A punch in the face is assault.


The threat of a punch in the face ensures that the good solid check remains just that.


----------



## Milkman (Feb 2, 2006)

screamingdaisy said:


> Every reader poll I've ever read says otherwise.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I see lots of rationalization for bad behaviour above.

I find the double standard difficult to swallow. It's tough to tell your kids that violence is unacceptable in school and on the street when you get all excited about a fight during a hockey game.

As for this statement, "Hockey is too fast and too dynamic a game to rely on the ref/linesman to take care of you, even in leagues where they've attempted to remove the most violent aspects.", the same could be said for the situation on the streets.

We really can't rely on the police to enforce the laws. Sadly there are folks who use this sort of rationale to justify arming their homes.


Anyway, as I said, these are just my opinions.


----------



## GuyB (May 2, 2008)

In fact, the best hockey game I ever saw was in the early 70's between the Montreal Canadians and a Russian team : real hockey as it should be, fast like hell, intelligent team play, good checking but absolutely no violence at all, almost no stops on the play, the puck was going from one way to the other without a rest. Even my girlfriend at the time, who did'nt like hockey, watched all the game, sitting on the edge of the sofa, captivated by, I should say, a real piece of art !
I just can't believe, or understand, the argument that says that hockey can't be played without violence.


----------



## Steadfastly (Nov 14, 2008)

screamingdaisy said:


> Every reader poll I've ever read says otherwise.


Regardless of what any reader's poll says, they are simply that, reader's polls and are far from scientific.


----------



## screamingdaisy (Oct 14, 2008)

Milkman said:


> I see lots of rationalization for bad behaviour above.


I was at the fights when a game of hockey broke out.



> I find the double standard difficult to swallow. It's tough to tell your kids that violence is unacceptable in school and on the street when you get all excited about a fight during a hockey game.


I fought a lot in school. I was a small kid with a big mouth and I was taught not to allow myself to be pushed around by others. Perhaps that's why I understand hockey.



> As for this statement, "Hockey is too fast and too dynamic a game to rely on the ref/linesman to take care of you, even in leagues where they've attempted to remove the most violent aspects.", the same could be said for the situation on the streets.


I've been in fights there too. Cops can't be everywhere. It's best you not count on them to take care of you either.



> We really can't rely on the police to enforce the laws. Sadly there are folks who use this sort of rationale to justify arming their homes.


People arming themselves is silly, and I have my reasons for feeling so. However, I'd like to keep this topic focused on hockey.

Beyond that, lets not try to extrapolate violence in a violent game as being an excuse for all the sillyness that happens in the world.



GuyB said:


> In fact, the best hockey game I ever saw was in the early 70's between the Montreal Canadians and a Russian team : real hockey as it should be, fast like hell, intelligent team play, good checking but absolutely no violence at all, almost no stops on the play, the puck was going from one way to the other without a rest. Even my girlfriend at the time, who did'nt like hockey, watched all the game, sitting on the edge of the sofa, captivated by, I should say, a real piece of art !
> I just can't believe, or understand, the argument that says that hockey can't be played without violence.


The Canada/US Olympic match in Salt Lake City was pretty damn good too.

However, not all games are of such calibre.



FlipFlopFly said:


> Regardless of what any reader's poll says, they are simply that, reader's polls and are far from scientific.


No less scientific than accepting the words of some random guy on the internet.


----------



## Milkman (Feb 2, 2006)

screamingdaisy said:


> I fought a lot in school. I was a small kid with a big mouth and I was taught not to allow myself to be pushed around by others. Perhaps that's why I understand hockey.


I did not. I was able to use reason and diplomacy. I'm a big guy relatively speaking. Generally the guys who WANTED to fight were smaller than I was.




screamingdaisy said:


> I've been in fights there too. Cops can't be everywhere. It's best you not count on them to take care of you either.


I count on the cops. If I didn't I suppose it would make sense to arm myself.





screamingdaisy said:


> Beyond that, lets not try to extrapolate violence in a violent game as being an excuse for all the sillyness that happens in the world.


Hockey is not isolated or insulated from the world at large. The law really should apply in the rink as well as on the streets.

IMO


----------



## screamingdaisy (Oct 14, 2008)

Milkman said:


> I did not. I was able to use reason and diplomacy.


So, how do I negotiate my way out of a hip check....



> Hockey is not isolated or insulated from the world at large. The law really should apply in the rink as well as on the streets.
> 
> IMO


Volenti non fit injuria

(Latin: to one who is willing, no harm is done)

Volenti non fit injuria is a defence in tort that means where a person engages in an event accepting and aware of the risks inherent in that event, then they can not later complain of, or seek compensation for an injury suffered during the event. This is used often to defend against tort actions as a result of a sports injury.

Fisticuffs and other acts of violence in hockey, such as checking, holding, striking, intimidation, and being struck by a puck or other piece of equipment are considered risks inherent in the event. So far as I know, most extreme acts of violence in hockey have been subject to criminal charges, as well as league discipline.


----------



## devnulljp (Mar 18, 2008)

OK, Don Cherry? Who? Never heard of him. By the sounds of things doesn't look like I'm missing much. 



screamingdaisy said:


> I was at the fights when a game of hockey broke out.


We had a guy in my Kempo class one time who had played a lot of hockey. After class a bunch of us were chatting about different martial arts: in Aikido you'd do this, in Hapkido this, the Jeet Kun Do thing is this...and he piped in with in hockey we'd do this...I thought that was funny. 


screamingdaisy said:


> I fought a lot in school. I was a small kid with a big mouth and I was taught not to allow myself to be pushed around by others. Perhaps that's why I understand hockey.


And now you have a tank! Sweet. :banana:


----------



## screamingdaisy (Oct 14, 2008)

devnulljp said:


> And now you have a tank! Sweet. :banana:


Ironically (considering the conversation), if you look at the first picture, you can see where someone's kicked me in the head twice....


----------



## Robert1950 (Jan 21, 2006)




----------



## Robert1950 (Jan 21, 2006)




----------



## devnulljp (Mar 18, 2008)

Does he always dress in the dark?

(We had wallpaper like that in the 70s)


----------



## screamingdaisy (Oct 14, 2008)

I actually kinda like the blue/white w/ iced glasses look. Though I'd never be caught dead in it myself.


----------



## devnulljp (Mar 18, 2008)

screamingdaisy said:


> I actually kinda like the blue/white w/ iced glasses look. Though I'd never be caught dead in it myself.


It would look great with your big furry hat... 



(I need the hide behind the couch smiley from TGP...)


----------



## zontar (Oct 25, 2007)

devnulljp said:


> It would look great with your big furry hat...


Don wore a big furry hat in 2004-


----------



## devnulljp (Mar 18, 2008)

zontar said:


> Don wore a big furry hat in 2004-


This thread is teh awesome. (And you owe me a new keyboard...this one's got coffee all over it now )


----------



## screamingdaisy (Oct 14, 2008)

devnulljp said:


> It would look great with your big furry hat...
> 
> 
> 
> (I need the hide behind the couch smiley from TGP...)


:sport-smiley-002:

Actually, that's pretty good. :rockon: I just wanted to use the "violence" smiley in this thread.


----------



## zontar (Oct 25, 2007)

devnulljp said:


> This thread is teh awesome. (And you owe me a new keyboard...this one's got coffee all over it now )


----------



## Milkman (Feb 2, 2006)

screamingdaisy said:


> So, how do I negotiate my way out of a hip check....
> 
> 
> 
> ...



You don't negotiate your way out of a hip check. You keep you head up coming across the blue line or take your chances. Turnabout is fair play as they say. 

The thuggery and hooliganism that you seem to enjoy is not hockey IMO. It's what idiots resort to when they run out of skills or are faced with a superior oponent

Again, it comes down to opinion. Those who enjoy a good olde fight during a hockey game will never change their minds about that, and I probably won't either.

Why stop at a punch in the face. Heck, you get on the ice you should expect a stick in the teeth every once in awhile.

To each their own.:smilie_flagge17:


----------



## screamingdaisy (Oct 14, 2008)

Milkman said:


> You don't negotiate your way out of a hip check. You keep you head up coming across the blue line or take your chances. Turnabout is fair play as they say.
> 
> The thuggery and hooliganism that you seem to enjoy is not hockey IMO. It's what idiots resort to when they run out of skills or are faced with a superior oponent
> 
> ...


Yup. And thankfully you're not in charge.


----------



## Milkman (Feb 2, 2006)

screamingdaisy said:


> Yup. And thankfully you're not in charge.


Right back at ya!


----------



## screamingdaisy (Oct 14, 2008)

Milkman said:


> Right back at ya!


Fair enough! :food-smiley-004:


----------



## fraser (Feb 24, 2007)

> Heck, you get on the ice you should expect a stick in the teeth every once in awhile.


stick in the face type injuries are far more common than fighting related injuries lol, as are checking related injuries and puck related injuries. rarely does anybody hurt anything other than theyre hands in a fight on the ice.
best if we remove checking, sticks and pucks from the game. then the players can wear shorts, and the fans can do all the fighting. :smile:
im seeing your agenda-


----------



## fraser (Feb 24, 2007)

screamindaisy- never knew what you did for a living - respect to ya:food-smiley-004:


----------



## Milkman (Feb 2, 2006)

fraser said:


> stick in the face type injuries are far more common than fighting related injuries lol, as are checking related injuries and puck related injuries. rarely does anybody hurt anything other than theyre hands in a fight on the ice.
> best if we remove checking, sticks and pucks from the game. then the players can wear shorts, and the fans can do all the fighting. :smile:
> im seeing your agenda-


No, you're seeing what you want to see.

It's not the injuries from fighting that make it offensive and if you can't understand that, no amount of tossing witty comments back and forth is going to help.

However, once again, I have no desire to see hockey turned into a non contact sport. A good solid check is fine. 

I stand by my opinion.


----------

