Page 1 of 1

Who should light the torch? Apparently not Gretzky....

Posted: Fri Feb 12, 2010 10:01 am
by keithp40
http://sports.yahoo.com/olympics/vancou ... oly,219186

wow, i guess the concept of provinces in canada creates a greater rivalry than states in the the US. just because gretzky isn't from vancouver, people would be miffed that he would light the torch? you would think that canada has more national pride than that and could overcome provincial rivalries. when i think of canadian sports i think of hockey, when i think of the greatest hockey player ever (after tyson nash, of course) i think of wayne gretzky. that would be like dening michael jordan the possiblity of lighting the tourch just because the olympics were held in LA and letting him wait till the games possibly being held in illinois some day. better let gretzky do it, in december 2012, its all over.

i guess its one thing if he doesn't do it, but it's another thing to be upset if he did. just let oshie do it since he didn't get name to the USA team....and call it even

Re: Who should light the torch? Apparently not Gretzky....

Posted: Fri Feb 12, 2010 12:53 pm
by WaukeeBlues
keithp40 wrote:http://sports.yahoo.com/olympics/vancou ... oly,219186

wow, i guess the concept of provinces in canada creates a greater rivalry than states in the the US. just because gretzky isn't from vancouver, people would be miffed that he would light the torch?
You mean British Columbia?

Re: Who should light the torch? Apparently not Gretzky....

Posted: Fri Feb 12, 2010 3:00 pm
by DaDitka
WaukeeBlues wrote:
keithp40 wrote:http://sports.yahoo.com/olympics/vancou ... oly,219186

wow, i guess the concept of provinces in canada creates a greater rivalry than states in the the US. just because gretzky isn't from vancouver, people would be miffed that he would light the torch?
You mean British Columbia?
Is that where they have 'English' classes at Mizzou?

:oops: :facepalm:

Re: Who should light the torch? Apparently not Gretzky....

Posted: Fri Feb 12, 2010 4:19 pm
by STLADOGG
Have Kariya do it he is from Vancouver!!

Re: Who should light the torch? Apparently not Gretzky....

Posted: Fri Feb 12, 2010 5:09 pm
by keithp40
WaukeeBlues wrote:
keithp40 wrote:http://sports.yahoo.com/olympics/vancou ... oly,219186

wow, i guess the concept of provinces in canada creates a greater rivalry than states in the the US. just because gretzky isn't from vancouver, people would be miffed that he would light the torch?
You mean British Columbia?
no......i meant vancouver...shall i get more non specific for you? how about the games are in canada, or north america, or the western hemisphere or the earth......what do you mean?

Re: Who should light the torch? Apparently not Gretzky....

Posted: Fri Feb 12, 2010 10:11 pm
by WaukeeBlues
keithp40 wrote:
WaukeeBlues wrote:
keithp40 wrote:http://sports.yahoo.com/olympics/vancou ... oly,219186

wow, i guess the concept of provinces in canada creates a greater rivalry than states in the the US. just because gretzky isn't from vancouver, people would be miffed that he would light the torch?
You mean British Columbia?
no......i meant vancouver...shall i get more non specific for you? how about the games are in canada, or north america, or the western hemisphere or the earth......what do you mean?
:lol: Fiesty aren't we.

You said "provinces in canada creates a greater rivalry" and then said that "because Gretzky isn't from Vancouver he won't light the torch?"

That doesn't follow. Vancouver isn't a province. Your word choice was confusing.

It was meant to be a humorous statement. It's not funny when I have to explain it :wink:

Re: Who should light the torch? Apparently not Gretzky....

Posted: Fri Feb 12, 2010 10:24 pm
by philco_3
WaukeeBlues wrote:
keithp40 wrote:
WaukeeBlues wrote:
keithp40 wrote:http://sports.yahoo.com/olympics/vancou ... oly,219186

wow, i guess the concept of provinces in canada creates a greater rivalry than states in the the US. just because gretzky isn't from vancouver, people would be miffed that he would light the torch?
You mean British Columbia?
no......i meant vancouver...shall i get more non specific for you? how about the games are in canada, or north america, or the western hemisphere or the earth......what do you mean?
:lol: Fiesty aren't we.

You said "provinces in canada creates a greater rivalry" and then said that "because Gretzky isn't from Vancouver he won't light the torch?"

That doesn't follow. Vancouver isn't a province. Your word choice was confusing.

It was meant to be a humorous statement. It's not funny when I have to explain it :wink:
:plusplus: :moran:

...just saying

Re: Who should light the torch? Apparently not Gretzky....

Posted: Fri Feb 12, 2010 10:50 pm
by abc789987
No sign of Wayne yet at the games? Maybe he will hand off the flame to the person who lights it?

*edit* oh cool, they used big joints to light it.

Re: Who should light the torch? Apparently not Gretzky....

Posted: Fri Feb 12, 2010 11:21 pm
by STLADOGG
I just saw Gretzky light some light fixture not sure what it was but it was cool to see.

Re: Who should light the torch? Apparently not Gretzky....

Posted: Sat Feb 13, 2010 10:23 am
by cprice12
Wow. The lighting of the cauldron was pretty much a disaster.

They had a malfunction with one of the legs that was to light the cauldron...so everyone is standing around, just waiting, it must have been for at least a couple minutes...and Gretzky looked pissed as he's just standing there with a torch...waiting. One leg of the contraption didn't rise up at all...but to tell you the truth it was a pretty lame effort even if it would have worked properly. Not very creative at all.

And after they light it, they're like...JUST KIDDING!! And they cart Gretzky in the back of a chevy pickup truck to light "the real" cauldron. WTF? I understand that it had to be outside so everyone can see it at any time, but it just seemed lame.

And you can choose any vehicle you want to transport Gretzky to the real cauldron, and you choose a pickup truck? :lol: How about a massive Hummer painted with candian colors with a sunroof and Gretzky standing through it?

The entire opening ceremony was pretty awful. Very boring. Big disappointment.

Re: Who should light the torch? Apparently not Gretzky....

Posted: Sat Feb 13, 2010 11:33 am
by Nyghtewynd
If that opening ceremonies had been in the United States, it would have been an international disgrace. Luckily, it's Just Canada.

Re: Who should light the torch? Apparently not Gretzky....

Posted: Sat Feb 13, 2010 11:50 am
by abc789987
I dounno, I thought the opening ceremony was pretty good. The light show on the floor was awesome, imo. I really don't see what was not to like. Sure the end lighting of the flame kind of sucked but whatever.

Re: Who should light the torch? Apparently not Gretzky....

Posted: Sat Feb 13, 2010 11:21 pm
by cprice12
The floor was cool. And the whales swimming by was my favorite part...but the performances sucked. Half the time it was just a bunch of people aimlessly wondering around.

They really needed to do something special to follow up the amazing summer olympic opening ceremony in China a couple years ago...and they didn't.

This one pretty much sucked. It was just boring. I kept waiting for something really cool to happen, and it didn't.

Re: Who should light the torch? Apparently not Gretzky....

Posted: Sun Feb 14, 2010 2:52 am
by ViPeRx007
cprice12 wrote:The floor was cool. And the whales swimming by was my favorite part...but the performances sucked. Half the time it was just a bunch of people aimlessly wondering around.

They really needed to do something special to follow up the amazing summer olympic opening ceremony in China a couple years ago...and they didn't.

This one pretty much sucked. It was just boring. I kept waiting for something really cool to happen, and it didn't.
Considering this ceremony cost $38 million compared to $300 million for Beijing I thought it was pretty good. The Chinese set the bar ridiculously high for the opening/closing ceremonies; it was in a league by itself, as it should have been with that budget.

I'm not sure it's fair to judge this one based on that. It's like comparing the Florida Marlins to the New York Yankees.

Re: Who should light the torch? Apparently not Gretzky....

Posted: Sun Feb 14, 2010 6:47 am
by glen a richter
ViPeRx007 wrote:
Considering this ceremony cost $38 million compared to $300 million for Beijing I thought it was pretty good. The Chinese set the bar ridiculously high for the opening/closing ceremonies; it was in a league by itself, as it should have been with that budget.
Well also that if the workers hadn't rolled out the best damn opening ceremony possible in Beijing, there would have been mass executions.

Re: Who should light the torch? Apparently not Gretzky....

Posted: Sun Feb 14, 2010 3:56 pm
by Nyghtewynd
*DINGDINGDING*

The Beijing OC was just creepy.

Re: Who should light the torch? Apparently not Gretzky....

Posted: Sun Feb 14, 2010 4:38 pm
by ViPeRx007
glen a richter wrote:
ViPeRx007 wrote:
Considering this ceremony cost $38 million compared to $300 million for Beijing I thought it was pretty good. The Chinese set the bar ridiculously high for the opening/closing ceremonies; it was in a league by itself, as it should have been with that budget.
Well also that if the workers hadn't rolled out the best damn opening ceremony possible in Beijing, there would have been mass executions.
WHATEVER IT TAKES!

Re: Who should light the torch? Apparently not Gretzky....

Posted: Mon Feb 15, 2010 10:55 am
by cprice12
ViPeRx007 wrote:
cprice12 wrote:The floor was cool. And the whales swimming by was my favorite part...but the performances sucked. Half the time it was just a bunch of people aimlessly wondering around.

They really needed to do something special to follow up the amazing summer olympic opening ceremony in China a couple years ago...and they didn't.

This one pretty much sucked. It was just boring. I kept waiting for something really cool to happen, and it didn't.
Considering this ceremony cost $38 million compared to $300 million for Beijing I thought it was pretty good. The Chinese set the bar ridiculously high for the opening/closing ceremonies; it was in a league by itself, as it should have been with that budget.

I'm not sure it's fair to judge this one based on that. It's like comparing the Florida Marlins to the New York Yankees.
I'm not saying it had to be as good as China's opening ceremony...that would have taken a half a billion dollars...which would have been stupid, but at least try and do something cool.

The beginning with the native north canadians coming onto the stage was dull. It was like they told them to run out there and do whatever you want. It looked disorganized.

K.D. Lang singing "Hallelujah" wasn't anything special. I've heard much better versions of that song. Rufus Wainright's version is 10x better. So I was like..."Meh".

Most of the time the groups of people on the stage were just aimlessly wandering around, trying to appear in awe of what they were looking at...I dunno...too much artsy and not enough cool.

I thought the guy flying around was going to be cool, but he just kept doing the same thing, over and over and over. Land on a wheat field...then go up...land on a wheat field...then go up...land on a wheat field... enough already. It was cool at first, and they never improved on it and it went on too long.

The guy doing the poetry was pretty good, I have to admit...better than I thought it was going to be.

Nelly Furtado and Bryan Adams kinda bombed.

All in all, pretty boring wit a few things that were interesting. It could have been a lot better. The only time I turned to my wife and said, "Well that's cool." was when the whales were swimming across the floor or the arena and the steam shot up like it was from their blowholes. That was a really cool effect.

Re: Who should light the torch? Apparently not Gretzky....

Posted: Mon Feb 15, 2010 2:21 pm
by keithp40
canada sports = hockey, they just should have dedicated the entire opening ceremony to the game of hockey because we all know that it is going to get screwed over by the networks in coverage.