Fleury almost gets in 'little scrap' with Canadiens' goalie
The smile on Marc-Andre Fleury's face rarely disappears.
It remained, even as the goaltender came within a final deke around referee Kyle Rehman from fighting for the first time in his NHL career.
“Just a little scrap,” Fleury said.
It was almost much more.
Following a Brandon Prust punch to the face of defenseman Brooks Orpik late in the third period of the Penguins' 5-1 victory against Montreal, a melee ensued and involved the goaltenders. Montreal's Peter Budaj, playing in place of the pulled Carey Price, skated to the Canadiens blue line during an altercation that took place by the Penguins net.
Fleury, noticing that Budaj was approaching, motioned toward his fellow netminder and then skated toward him. Rehman, likely mindful that a goaltender fight in Philadelphia earlier this season showered the NHL with embarrassment, quickly skated toward Fleury to diffuse the situation. However, Fleury skated around the referee and nearly reached Budaj before Rehman and another official were able to snuff the incident.
“I know how much he wanted to fight him,” defenseman Kris Letang said of Fleury. “It would have made the fans happy. But there's always a risk of injury.”
Fleury's teammates seemed quite amused by the altercation, many of them failing to hide their grins while the goaltender was swarmed by the media moments following the victory.
“I think he's been waiting for that chance for a while,” Letang said. “It was fun to see his teeth in the back of his mask.”
It was better than seeing his teeth on the ice.
Fleury, incidentally, was informed following the game that Budaj is trained in martial arts.
His tone, for just a moment, turned serious.
“Wow,” Fleury said. “Really? Are you serious? If I had known that, I would have left my mask on.”
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments â either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.