Originally Posted by
limitles
I haven't heard one word about it. Doesn't surprise me that Sinclair would say something like that being as classy as she is.You've got a real hard on for me don't ya or you have something going with the women's team.But you tell me how that wasn't a similar situation to Marc Crawford in Japan. ga ahead
Originally Posted by
limitles
Originally Posted by
limitles
I haven't heard one word about it. Doesn't surprise me that Sinclair would say something like that being as classy as she is.You've got a real hard on for me don't ya or you have something going with the women's team.But you tell me how that wasn't a similar situation to Marc Crawford in Japan. ga ahead
Just googled Canada coach criticized and got not one hit so tell me what story I'm perpetuating?
I thought you were actually following the team which is why I said "must know" but I guess not if you didn't hear "one word about it". I actually watched the game & it was all the talking heads on TSN could talk about after the game until it was revealed Sinclair was supposed to take the shot & deferred for the reason already stated.
Not sure how you think Crawford not selecting Gretzky as 1 of his 5 to take a shootout attempt & Sinclair being selected & then deferring to a teammate are similar from a controversy perspective. The coach didn't send "a relative rookie to the line" Christine Sinclair sent her to the line & that's a pretty big difference.
You obviously don't know what perpetuating means. The story was reported exactly the way you described it, it was debunked by the team as false & you're now repeating it as some kind of fact when it's been debunked as false. This is basically the exact definition of the word.