2019 NHL Playoffs

[Jukester]

Disallowed goal on an offside line change challenge...GTFO. NHL giving the old NFL catch rule a run for it's money.  GO BLUES!

[plenzmd1]

@DanteSharks are now my team...think they have the best chance of beating whoever comes out of the East..and that's all I really care about

[Dante]

9 hours ago, Jukester said:

Disallowed goal on an offside line change challenge...GTFO. NHL giving the old NFL catch rule a run for it's money.  GO BLUES!

Offside is offside. Sharks did the job the refs missed. Simple as that.

[May Day 10]

Its a terrible rule.  Whether it goes in favor of, or against the Sabres, I loathe it.  It is the stupidest thing the NHL could do.  

[plenzmd1]

13 minutes ago, May Day 10 said:

Its a terrible rule.  Whether it goes in favor of, or against the Sabres, I loathe it.  It is the stupidest thing the NHL could do.  

what's funny is if the puck goes off the mesh, play is dead and stopped, just like if someone goes offside...unless the refs miss it and then a pass is completed, and then the play is a ok..replay cannot overturn it.

 

You know, just like the offside replay ?

 

Sports league always overreact to the one egregious miss, just the NFL is doing with PI. Cant wait to see JA hit Brown with a 65 yd play, no flags, clearly in, but now we gotta wait for a replay challenge for offensive PI..just kick me in the nads now.

 

THERE WILL BE NO CELBRATING IN SPORTS!!!!!!!

Edited May 9, 2019 by plenzmd1

[K-9]

Why was Landeskog just standing there for a few moments waiting to get on the bench? Were other Avs players too slow in sliding over to make room for him? Was there a problem with the bench door? Strange.

[snafu]

10 minutes ago, plenzmd1 said:

PI..just kick me in the nads now.

 

The line is already twenty people deep!

 

 

[KD in CA]

27 minutes ago, plenzmd1 said:

what's funny is if the puck goes off the mesh, play is dead and stopped, just like if someone goes offside...unless the refs miss it and then a pass is completed, and then the play is a ok..replay cannot overturn it.

 

You know, just like the offside replay ?

 

Sports league always overreact to the one egregious miss, just the NFL is doing with PI. Cant wait to see JA hit Brown with a 65 yd play, no flags, clearly in, but now we gotta wait for a replay challenge for offensive PI..just kick me in the nads now.

 

THERE WILL BE NO CELBRATING IN SPORTS!!!!!!!

 

It's almost like people would rather watch a video game than watch humans.

 

The most absurd example now is how baseball reply is primarily used to attempt to decide if a guy's midsection comes off second base for a millisecond while he slides over the bag after he beats the throw.  But the pending PI disaster will far exceed that.

 

When I am Emperor, not only will all replay be outlawed forever, those who most vociferously advocated for it will be sent to labor camps as punishment.

[May Day 10]

Yes, they have drilled down way too deep.  The baseball example is a good one.  After being safe, a player's cleat bumps off the bag by a millimeter while the tag is being applied.  I guess they can break their ankles.  In this case, Im perfectly fine with the umpire making the call (whether it goes for or against my team).

 

The Offside rule in hockey... the spirit of the rule is so a player doesnt go in before the puck to gain an advantage.  It isnt an 'out of bounds line.   IMO, over history it has been called way better than adequately.  I never desired super slow-mo ultra zoomed in reviews to see a molecule of ice between a player's toe and the blue line (before a play that went behind the net, the defense gains control, cant clear it, and the team ends up setting up a play and scoring.  

 

The Offside rule only serves to remove goals and excitement by way of a technicality.  It cannot add goals or offense.  A linesman blows an offside call the other way, the offensive team cannot 'challenge' that to get their offensive rush back.  It is looney tunes.  

 

Now there is momentum to reviewing 5 minute major penalties.... honestly, in my 35 years of watching hockey, I have never come close to desiring this.  

[KD in CA]

5 minutes ago, May Day 10 said:

Yes, they have drilled down way too deep.  The baseball example is a good one.  After being safe, a player's cleat bumps off the bag by a millimeter while the tag is being applied.  I guess they can break their ankles.  In this case, Im perfectly fine with the umpire making the call (whether it goes for or against my team).

 

The Offside rule in hockey... the spirit of the rule is so a player doesnt go in before the puck to gain an advantage.  It isnt an 'out of bounds line.   IMO, over history it has been called way better than adequately.  I never desired super slow-mo ultra zoomed in reviews to see a molecule of ice between a player's toe and the blue line (before a play that went behind the net, the defense gains control, cant clear it, and the team ends up setting up a play and scoring.  

 

The Offside rule only serves to remove goals and excitement by way of a technicality.  It cannot add goals or offense.  A linesman blows an offside call the other way, the offensive team cannot 'challenge' that to get their offensive rush back.  It is looney tunes.  

 

Now there is momentum to reviewing 5 minute major penalties.... honestly, in my 35 years of watching hockey, I have never come close to desiring this.  

 

Wait till they decide some of them are 'targeting' like in college football.  That's another beaut.  

[Jauronimo]

30 minutes ago, May Day 10 said:

Yes, they have drilled down way too deep.  The baseball example is a good one.  After being safe, a player's cleat bumps off the bag by a millimeter while the tag is being applied.  I guess they can break their ankles.  In this case, Im perfectly fine with the umpire making the call (whether it goes for or against my team).

 

The Offside rule in hockey... the spirit of the rule is so a player doesnt go in before the puck to gain an advantage.  It isnt an 'out of bounds line.   IMO, over history it has been called way better than adequately.  I never desired super slow-mo ultra zoomed in reviews to see a molecule of ice between a player's toe and the blue line (before a play that went behind the net, the defense gains control, cant clear it, and the team ends up setting up a play and scoring.  

 

The Offside rule only serves to remove goals and excitement by way of a technicality.  It cannot add goals or offense.  A linesman blows an offside call the other way, the offensive team cannot 'challenge' that to get their offensive rush back.  It is looney tunes.  

 

Now there is momentum to reviewing 5 minute major penalties.... honestly, in my 35 years of watching hockey, I have never come close to desiring this.  

I have no problem with reviewing major penalties.  Non fighting 5 minute majors happen like 3 times a year and in m y entire hockey watching life, the only one that struck me as even controversial was the Pavelski call. 

 

5 minute majors are typically decided by outcomes rather than the actual offense. More of them probably should be called if "intent to injure" meant anything in a sport where giving a guy a jab to the face, a cross check in the lower back beneath the pads, and a chop to ankle are routine non calls.

[snafu]

1 hour ago, KD in CA said:

When I am Emperor, not only will all replay be outlawed forever, those who most vociferously advocated for it will be sent to labor camps as punishment.

 

Actually, I intend to be Emperor, but when I am I will give this proposal serious consideration. In fact I'm offering you a position as Minister for the Persecution of Frivolous Behavior. 

[KD in CA]

1 hour ago, snafu said:

 

Actually, I intend to be Emperor, but when I am I will give this proposal serious consideration. In fact I'm offering you a position as Minister for the Persecution of Frivolous Behavior. 

 

Boy, talk about doing what you love for a living!

[Jukester]

3 hours ago, Dante said:

Offside is offside. Sharks did the job the refs missed. Simple as that.

 

3 hours ago, May Day 10 said:

Its a terrible rule.  Whether it goes in favor of, or against the Sabres, I loathe it.  It is the stupidest thing the NHL could do.  

 

Correct, horrible rule.  If the guy can't get called for too many men on the ice then he is inactive as a player.  Why should he qualify for Offside.  Hate inconsisten schite like this in sports when common sense can't be used when making rules. And forget the fact that his skate looked like it was still on the blue line when the puck was in the zone. At worst, inconclusive.  

[The Senator]

1 hour ago, Jauronimo said:

I have no problem with reviewing major penalties.  Non fighting 5 minute majors happen like 3 times a year and in m y entire hockey watching life, the only one that struck me as even controversial was the Pavelski call. 

 

5 minute majors are typically decided by outcomes rather than the actual offense. More of them probably should be called if "intent to injure" meant anything in a sport where giving a guy a jab to the face, a cross check in the lower back beneath the pads, and a chop to ankle are routine non calls.

 

I thought all you had to do, to turn a 2-minute minor into a 5- minute major, was bite your lip hard enough to draw blood.

 

Guess no one does that anymore.  Yesteryear’s players were a different breed.

.

[shrader]

3 hours ago, plenzmd1 said:

what's funny is if the puck goes off the mesh, play is dead and stopped, just like if someone goes offside...unless the refs miss it and then a pass is completed, and then the play is a ok..replay cannot overturn it.

 

 

 

I thought they had fixed that years ago when it happened in a Detroit game (back before the challenge rule).  So when I heard that one the other day, I was shocked.  I guess they can't allow it due to the rare circumstance where the puck off the mesh is missed, then play resumes for about 5 minutes before a goal is scored.  Even that, you'd think should have an easy work around.  Allow the replay up until the point where the puck leaves the offensive zone.

 

Edit: But hey, we are talking about the same league where you weren't allowed to review a play where the puck went through the outside of the net.

Edited May 9, 2019 by shrader

[Q-baby!]

37 minutes ago, The Senator said:

 

I thought all you had to do, to turn a 2-minute minor into a 5- minute major, was bite your lip hard enough to draw blood.

 

Guess no one does that anymore.  Yesteryear’s players were a different breed.

.

That would make it a double-minor. 4 minute penalty. 

 

 

[Jauronimo]

47 minutes ago, The Senator said:

 

I thought all you had to do, to turn a 2-minute minor into a 5- minute major, was bite your lip hard enough to draw blood.

 

Guess no one does that anymore.  Yesteryear’s players were a different breed.

.

That's how a 2 min minor becomes a 4 minute double-minor power play.  A major call requires intent to injure.  

[The Senator]

13 minutes ago, Jauronimo said:

That's how a 2 min minor becomes a 4 minute double-minor power play.  A major call requires intent to injure.  

 

Guess I missed that rule change - back in the ‘70’s, 80’s, even the 90’s I think, a high stick that drew blood was always a 5-minute major.

.

Edited May 9, 2019 by The Senator

[May Day 10]

1 minute ago, The Senator said:

 

Guess I missed that rule change - back in the ‘70’s, 80’s, even the 90’s I think, a high stick that drew blood was always a 5-minute major.

.

 

It has always been based on flagrancy/amount of 'carelessness'.  2 minutes for HS, double minor for blood, 5 minute major if severe violation.

 

I always loved how hockey has a penalty tangibly based on if there is bleeding or not.