News Article: In which R** R**** gets laughed at by the players he writes about..

[schmidtlesauce]

nvm found it http://hfboards.mandatory.com/showthread.php?t=1177417

 

[steveg]

nvm found it http://hfboards.mandatory.com/showthread.php?t=1177417

WOW. Thanks for sharing that link, schmidt. You could really see Neal's disdain for Rossi during that response...wow.

 

[Crafton]

To be perfectly honest, he's done nothing of note other than be involved in the Hill scandal. He rarely speaks during sessions, never writes opinions, and was utterly unremarkable before being nominated. Most court followers describe him as the dumbest justice ever.

it's nearly impossible to agree with what you've written but i'd say his insufferable presence has had some effects. namely, his ass-backward originalist stance sheds a more nuanced light on Scalia's textualism. and of course, his mere presence and inability to craft a majority decision gave Kennedy and O'Connor more room to operate during the Rehnquist years. yes, he's a thoroughly mediocre justice and the Hill scandal is perhaps the most noteworthy thing he's been a party to, but i'd argue he's had some kind of effect on the court. can't believe this ****er might be on the court for 40 years (by all accounts he's the most physically fit of the justices and has claimed his goal is to outlive all his critics).

 

[Crafton]

it's nearly impossible to agree with what you've written but i'd say his insufferable presence has had some effects. namely, his ass-backward originalist stance sheds a more nuanced light on Scalia's textualism. and of course, his mere presence and inability to craft a majority decision gave Kennedy and O'Connor more room to operate during the Rehnquist years. yes, he's a thoroughly mediocre justice and the Hill scandal is perhaps the most noteworthy thing he's been a party to, but i'd argue he's had some kind of effect on the court. can't believe this ****er might be on the court for 40 years (by all accounts he's the most physically fit of the justices and has claimed his goal is to outlive all his critics).

i mean, nearly impossible to disagree with what you said. damn, it sucks not being able to edit.

 

[Darth Vitale]

I have never voted, so no worries there. And yes, I am a science teacher. Unless I am mistaken, I don't think Clarence Thomas made any significant contributions to science.

Those who don't know the history of science are doomed to repeat it... or something. I'll give you a pass on the Anita Hill scandal but all voting age 'mericans should know who presides over the Supreme court and know their leanings at least, the same as they should know the basics about their Senators, Governor, etc. For instance, you being in South Carolina, you should know that this guy

is a big toolbag.


I ask you, science teacher...
http://www.quickmeme.com/meme/3tnh2g/

 

[Darth Vitale]

... namely, his ass-backward originalist stance sheds a more nuanced light on Scalia's textualism....

Rob Rossi's head just exploded. All this talk of politics has me in the mood to harvest some livers, rhetorically speaking of course.

 

[Iggy Smalls]

Rossi's voice is like nails on a chalkboard. I couldn't wait until the video ended.

 

[STLPensFan]

it's nearly impossible to agree with what you've written but i'd say his insufferable presence has had some effects. namely, his ass-backward originalist stance sheds a more nuanced light on Scalia's textualism. and of course, his mere presence and inability to craft a majority decision gave Kennedy and O'Connor more room to operate during the Rehnquist years. yes, he's a thoroughly mediocre justice and the Hill scandal is perhaps the most noteworthy thing he's been a party to, but i'd argue he's had some kind of effect on the court. can't believe this ****er might be on the court for 40 years (by all accounts he's the most physically fit of the justices and has claimed his goal is to outlive all his critics).

I have no idea how this discussion has turned from Rob Rossi's knowledge of hockey to Clarence Thomas' jurisprudence.

As a Missouri Law Student who spends all if his minimal spare time as a Pens fan, I have to endorse the comparison.

 

[Pens1566]

i mean, nearly impossible to disagree with what you said. damn, it sucks not being able to edit.

I'm glad I saw this version of your answer before I responded to the first

I agree he's had an affect. It would be impossible not to when you're one of 9 that gets to decide what will be precedent for the entire country. That would be the limit of it though. He's simply a vote. You or I (or anyone with common sense) could do that however.

 

[Pens1566]

I have no idea how this discussion has turned from Rob Rossi's knowledge of hockey to Clarence Thomas' jurisprudence.

As a Missouri Law Student who spends all if his minimal spare time as a Pens fan, I have to endorse the comparison.

That's it then. Rossi is the Clarence Thomas of hockey beat writers. Minus the coke can.

 

[Ogrezilla]

Those who don't know the history of science are doomed to repeat it... or something. I'll give you a pass on the Anita Hill scandal but all voting age 'mericans should know who presides over the Supreme court and know their leanings at least, the same as they should know the basics about their Senators, Governor, etc. For instance, you being in South Carolina, you should know that this guy

is a big toolbag.

Knowing their leanings and the basics is not enough to cast an educated vote. I am not going to spend the time to properly know the candidates I could vote for to cast an educated vote. I'm simply not. Its not worth it considering the time it would take, my dislike of the subject and the overall insignificance of my vote. Thus, I don't vote.

I ask you, science teacher...
http://www.quickmeme.com/meme/3tnh2g/

Being in America, I guess I am exactly America free I'm not exactly sure where that falls compared to things like Canada free, France free, England free, Spain free, Switzerland free, etc.

 

[Sureshot]

That was like watching Ricky Gervais in The Office.

 

[Allie Kitsune]

Rob Rossi's head just exploded. All this talk of politics has me in the mood to harvest some livers, rhetorically speaking of course.

The Personal is Political. Even among fans of the same hockey team.

 

[Ogelthorpe]

Haha...Thanks Rossi

 

[On Vinyl]

WTF is going on in this thread *slowly walks out*

 

[AltDess]

Reading this thread, one now knows exactly who their enemies are.
And it's only going to get worse.

 

[Crafton]

Reading this thread, one now knows exactly who their enemies are.
And it's only going to get worse.

 

[Candyman]

Forgive my ignorance, but can someone tell me what F3 means? I'm assuming it's the 3rd forward? but seriously I don't know. (please note i've never played competitve hockey so I've never had a coach or anything like that so don't flame me to bad)

 

[Frederick Stanley]

Forgive my ignorance, but can someone tell me what F3 means? I'm assuming it's the 3rd forward? but seriously I don't know. (please note i've never played competitve hockey so I've never had a coach or anything like that so don't flame me to bad)

http://www.livestrong.com/article/545615-what-is-an-f3-forward-in-hockey/

 

[steveg]

Forgive my ignorance, but can someone tell me what F3 means? I'm assuming it's the 3rd forward? but seriously I don't know. (please note i've never played competitve hockey so I've never had a coach or anything like that so don't flame me to bad)

F3 is a name given to a forward when playing a type of scheme where player responsibilities change depending upon who enters the zone when. Thus, instead of right-wing/center/left wing, it's F1/F2/F3 -- with the designation of who is who dependent upon the order of zone entry; it's a more "fluid" way for players to assume their responsibilities in the o-zone and d-zones. When on offense, moving into the attacking zone, F3 means third forward into the zone; the first forward in (F1) forechecks the puck carrier. The second (F2) also forechecks -- for instance he may go to the other side of the net waiting for a pass around the back boards. The third guy into the zone (F3) plays high, in the slot area, or along the half-wall. He is in a bit more defensive posture. When the puck leaves the zone, that F3 leaves quickly joining the defense. He then is the first forward entering the defensive zone, becoming the F1. He goes hard on the back check. The guy who becomes the new F3, in the defensive zone, will be the last guy reaching the d-zone action (usually the guy who was the F1 or F2 on the prior rush into the o-zone).

This is roughly how it works, though there's more to it.

I'm no expert in coaching/strategy, but basically this is it.

*EDIT* or, just read the link Frederick Stanley posted... (oops! my bad!)

 

[End of Line]

Once a moron, always a moron.

 

[Candyman]

http://www.livestrong.com/article/545615-what-is-an-f3-forward-in-hockey/

F3 is a name given to a forward when playing a type of scheme where player responsibilities change depending upon who enters the zone when. Thus, instead of right-wing/center/left wing, it's F1/F2/F3 -- with the designation of who is who dependent upon the order of zone entry; it's a more "fluid" way for players to assume their responsibilities in the o-zone and d-zones. When on offense, moving into the attacking zone, F3 means third forward into the zone; the first forward in (F1) forechecks the puck carrier. The second (F2) goes to the other side of the net waiting for a pass around the back boards, for instance. The third guy into the zone (F3) plays high, in the slot area. He is in a bit more defensive posture. When the puck leaves the zone, that F3 leaves quickly joining the defense. He then is the first forward entering the defensive zone, becoming the F1. He goes hard on the back check. The guy who becomes the new F3, in the defensive zone, will be the last guy into the d-zone (usually the guy who was the F1 or F2 on the prior rush into the o-zone).

This is roughly how it works, though there's more to it.

I'm no expert, but basically this is it.

*EDIT* or, just read the link Frederick Stanley posted... (oops! my bad!)

Thanks guys I know it's easy to flame someone for something like this, so I appreciate the non-sarcastic responses.

 

[steveg]

Not a problem at all. You are fully excused for not knowing hockey strategy and naming convention. A hockey beat-writer in a major city though, should NOT be excused, IMO. It would be one thing if Rossi was hired as the beat writer without knowing this on the day he was hired. But, doesn't the guy have enough pride in his work to see to it that he learns it quickly -- both for himself, and for those he is writing for? I simply cannot imagine myself not having the personal responsibility and accountability to make sure to get myself educated on the finer details of the subject matter I'm responsible for/paid for reporting on. Shouldn't that be a given?

Amazing...

 

[ZapRowsdower13]

But inside it's mostly about Ross Perot, and the last two chapters are excerpts from the Oliver North trial.

NICE! Greatest show ever!

Thanks guys I know it's easy to flame someone for something like this, so I appreciate the non-sarcastic responses.

You're welcome Mr. Rossi.

 

[Stars]

Actually hockey strategy and zone coverage is something that is not discussed to often on any of the boards. All the teams use different set ups at different times during the game depending on the line,time, and skill level.
A lot of us rant about guys standing around.
Wingers who break out last usually end up having to stay high get caught wanting to go down low resulting in 3 on 2 's coming back.
Meanwhile the HFboard is screaming at the forward for not working the corner or floating in the high slot too much in the game.
Just ask Coach Rossi . R-3 is your second wingman in the bar who is usually drunk and makes you look good.