Jump to content
SiouxSports.com Forum

Recommended Posts

Posted

He's getting closer to the problems that sent Frattin home for a semester+. Hope he straightens out and turns it around like Frats did.

Posted

He's getting closer to the problems that sent Frattin home for a semester+. Hope he straightens out and turns it around like Frats did.

Yes, just a lawnmower toss away...

Posted

He's getting closer to the problems that sent Frattin home for a semester+. Hope he straightens out and turns it around like Frats did.

Frattin was a full blown blackout.....he needed to get himself figured out. I say sit chyz until the new year and figure out if this kid wants to actually play hockey. He had been picking his game up recently.

Posted

Frattin was a full blown blackout.....he needed to get himself figured out. I say sit chyz until the new year and figure out if this kid wants to actually play hockey. He had been picking his game up recently.

I'd agree, Brynn hasn't gone down to that level yet. We fans want you on the team.

Posted

I'd agree, Brynn hasn't gone down to that level yet. We fans want you on the team.

But if he's headed down that path, intervening now might be the best thing for the kid.

Posted

too much speculation for me to pass judgment. If it was a cab fare for $4, what were the circumstances? When did it occur?

His other two incidents are non-issues for me...the team initiation party and SpringFest after the season was over...he's in college.

He doesn't need an intervention.

Hak HAS to suspend him pending final resolution however.

  • Upvote 1
Posted

We don't know the terms and conditions that Hakstol laid down after the last incident (whether you consider it a big deal or not). It may not be the $4 issue, but rather that he did not meet the expectations placed on him.

Posted

FIRE HAK!!! Obviously.

I never said fire hak?

I just want to know if people think he has control over the team...

granted I know its college and kids binge drink all the time but its hockey season...gotta be committed to the team instead of downing beers.

I never said chyzk was drunk but something must of clouded his judgement at 1:41 am coming from down town....which only thing open in downtown at that time are bars.

with that beind said...cant believe that taxi drive went thru these lengths to get fricken 4 bucks...safe to say im avoiding that jackwagon now...

Posted

I never said fire hak?

I just want to know if people think he has control over the team...

granted I know its college and kids binge drink all the time but its hockey season...gotta be committed to the team instead of downing beers.

I never said chyzk was drunk but something must of clouded his judgement at 1:41 am coming from down town....which only thing open in downtown at that time are bars.

with that beind said...cant believe that taxi drive went thru these lengths to get fricken 4 bucks...safe to say im avoiding that jackwagon now...

You have committed the Cardinal Sin of questioning Hakstol's leadership of the program. I think it is fair to ask if Hakstol has control over his players; there have been a lot of incidences of stupidity the past couple of years.

Posted

You have committed the Cardinal Sin of questioning Hakstol's leadership of the program. I think it is fair to ask if Hakstol has control over his players; there have been a lot of incidences of stupidity the past couple of years.

Second that.
Posted

Good riddance... what a moron if there is any truth to this. I don't care if it's a candy bar or a car, stealing is stealing. I'm fine with big suspensions for alcohol related offences and I believe something like this is much worse.

  • Upvote 1
Posted

We know about three infractions, though each, by itself, is relatively minor. Together, they are very troubling, and there is probably a decent chance that other character evidence unrelated to reported events is part of Hak's assessment.

As for pleasing NG, they always do early on. Theft is theft, and $4 looks no different that $1,499 or whatever the felony cutoff is, on the record.

  • Upvote 2
Posted

He might've thought someone already paid for the cab or some other issue. Maybe someone else got dropped off at his place. Maybe he was drunk and gave a bad credit card #. Who knows. It is just highly unlikely he would risk serious trouble over $4. It sounds to me like circumstances.

Maybe he had a reason for not paying and got into a dispute, refusing to pay, where the cabbie then decided to go to the cops. At least he didn't beat the guy ala Patrick Kane. Maybe it had to do with correct change or something. Maybe the fare was $9 and he thinks he gave the cabbie a $10 and the cabbie insists it was a $5.

$4 is not intentional theft. No way.

  • Upvote 1
Posted

He might've thought someone already paid for the cab or some other issue. Maybe someone else got dropped off at his place. Maybe he was drunk and gave a bad credit card #. Who knows. It is just highly unlikely he would risk serious trouble over $4. It sounds to me like circumstances.

Maybe he had a reason for not paying and got into a dispute, refusing to pay, where the cabbie then decided to go to the cops. At least he didn't beat the guy ala Patrick Kane. Maybe it had to do with correct change or something. Maybe the fare was $9 and he thinks he gave the cabbie a $10 and the cabbie insists it was a $5.

$4 is not intentional theft. No way.

According to the GF Herald article, he took the cab from downtown to the Valley Dairy store at University and North Washington. The article didn't mention anyone else in the cab. The fare for that distance is approximately $4 according to the owner of the cab company. Instead of paying, he ran into the Valley Dairy store and didn't come out. As you suggest, there could be several different reasons he didn't pay. But none of them are good enough to risk trouble over $4.
Posted

He might've thought someone already paid for the cab or some other issue. Maybe someone else got dropped off at his place. Maybe he was drunk and gave a bad credit card #. Who knows. It is just highly unlikely he would risk serious trouble over $4. It sounds to me like circumstances.

Maybe he had a reason for not paying and got into a dispute, refusing to pay, where the cabbie then decided to go to the cops. At least he didn't beat the guy ala Patrick Kane. Maybe it had to do with correct change or something. Maybe the fare was $9 and he thinks he gave the cabbie a $10 and the cabbie insists it was a $5.

$4 is not intentional theft. No way.

You can quit defending the undefendable anytime. You are starting to sound like a Bison fan.

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...