Habs Journalist doesn't agree with Shea Weber's decisions

PUBLICATION

S. Harper
April 13, 2022 (2:41 PM)

SHARE THIS STORY

Its been a rough year in Montreal after coming 3 wins away from the Stanley Cup, and the Canadiens are having the worst year in the legendary franchise.

When things go bad it's easy to point fingers and blame each other or in Montreal case criticized by the media. During a season like this the Canadiens could have used some leadership that is missing without their captain Shea Weber.

As you know, Montreal Canadiens captain Shea Weber hasn't played since losing to the Tampa Bay Lightning in the Stanley cup final. Shea Weber's career really seems to be over.

We haven't heard from Weber in almost a year, he stays away from the media, he's never with the team and he didn't show up at many important moments, like major hires, team pictures, and the Canadiens annual Christmas visit to the sick kids of Montreal Hospital.

Some feel that as a captain, he has a certain duty, while others believe Weber has given his blood, sweat, tears, and body to this game.

Among the people who are against Weber's decisions is veteran journalist Réjean Tremblay, who very clearly revealed his opinion on the Weber saying:

"Before we worked out the details for a Genesis interview, he told me about that Weber, the Montreal Canadiens' reigning captain, who refused to come out and support his teammates, to cheer on Kent Hughes and Martin St. Louis in person, and who is too rude to even talk to reporters when they travel out west with the CH. A real shame.

How come everyone slept through this? Weber is the CH's captain, but we were weighing the chances and merits of Brendan Gallagher. The poor man who was seen as a future captain is falling apart and now we're talking about Nick Suzuki as the future "C" carrier.

We forget that the captain is in Vancouver, that he hasn't come to meet his teammates in Montreal except once in November, that he saw Marc Bergevin and Dominique Ducharme get fired and replaced by Hughes and St-Louis and that His Lordship is still too haughty to address the rabble."

Do you agree with him?