Jump to content

2019 NHL Playoffs


Mark Vader

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, May Day 10 said:

 

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.

 

Have to disagree - it was an automatic major if you drew blood.  That’s why some guys were so good at biting thru their lip (Ray Bourque comes to mind). 

 

Obviously, you can score more goals in major than a double-minor, and some guys bleed more easily, maybe making the current rule more fair.

.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, May Day 10 said:

Since I recall (1987 through now, but more vividly perhaps 1990 on), the blood was to detect a double-minor

Correct.  Blood has never been a qualification for a major penalty to the best of my knowledge.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Jukester said:

 

 

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.  

But the call was consistent. What your asking for is the ref to make a black and white call subjective. In effect, the exact opposite of consistency. My biggest problem with NHL officiating is the subjective nature of refereeing in the playoffs. What was illegal in the regular season is now ok in the playoffs. Refs now in the position to control the game by NOT calling all kinds of shite. Hell, I was screaming at the TV all series because the constant pick plays the Av's were running. Why no penalties? By trying to not have an impact on the game the refs are having the most impact by letting teams cheat. Really done with all the whining of calls made when all the other crap going on effects the game even more but not even mentioned. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, May Day 10 said:

 

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

 

It is so weird...............And, I don't remember it in the 70s.  Although maybe I just missed it.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Dante said:

But the call was consistent. What your asking for is the ref to make a black and white call subjective. In effect, the exact opposite of consistency. My biggest problem with NHL officiating is the subjective nature of refereeing in the playoffs. What was illegal in the regular season is now ok in the playoffs. Refs now in the position to control the game by NOT calling all kinds of shite. Hell, I was screaming at the TV all series because the constant pick plays the Av's were running. Why no penalties? By trying to not have an impact on the game the refs are having the most impact by letting teams cheat. Really done with all the whining of calls made when all the other crap going on effects the game even more but not even mentioned. 

No, i'm saying if the player is inactive for one rule, be consistent and make him inactive for all rules.

 

But i do agree with you on the double standard between reg season and playoffs.  Case in point, tonight's Boston game.  Been a beef of mine since i started watching hockey as a kid.

Edited by Jukester
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Jukester said:

No, i'm saying if the player is inactive for one rule, be consistent and make him inactive for all rules.

 

But i do agree with you on the double standard between reg season and playoffs.  Case in point, tonight's Boston game.  Been a beef of mine since i started watching hockey as a kid.

I feel it puts the refs in a really bad position. In addition to making the correct calls, now they have to make decisions when to call them. The prevailing mentality for years has been "We (the refs) don't want to affect the game" "Let 'em play" 

Well, they are influencing the outcome by letting teams interfere, hold and obstruct or whatever it is. There is a faceoff in my end and the Avs win the draw. Puck goes back to the point and a Shark forward goes out to cover. Landescog cuts him off in the faceoff circle preventing him from defending. Avs Dman scored from the point. More subtle and less obvious than either the Shark offside call or the 5 min major vs Vegas but just as impactful as a goal was allowed when there should have been a call. This has always bothered me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I still can’t believe that BOTH teams buffalo acquired 1st round picks from are playing against each other in the conference finals (giving them 2 of the last 4 picks in the 1st round). 

 

Thankfully we traded one one of the picks to Anaheim for Montour while it still had that value of the unknown. 

 

Unreal though. If that’s not buffalo luck, I don’t know what is.  lol

  • Haha (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/10/2019 at 12:58 PM, Dante said:

Couldn't fight it. Bought a couple of tix for game one. GO SHARKS!

 

 

You are celebrating now!

 

Two goals by Buffalo Bills fan Logan Couture! Sharks were on tonight, great win.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/9/2019 at 9:17 PM, Jukester said:

No, i'm saying if the player is inactive for one rule, be consistent and make him inactive for all rules.

 

But i do agree with you on the double standard between reg season and playoffs.  Case in point, tonight's Boston game.  Been a beef of mine since i started watching hockey as a kid.

  Why aren't the gates to each bench both in the neutral zone.

  That was a ridiculous reason to negate a goal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Mark Vader said:

Wow!

 

The Blues have every right to be furious, that looked like a hand pass.

 

I'm thrilled the Sharks came back and won, but the controversial ending feels uneasy.

That was a blatant hand pass. The Sharks must have pics of Bettman and a goat.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, ChevyVanMiller said:

That was a blatant hand pass. The Sharks must have pics of Bettman and a goat.

Which is why I hate that this non-call takes away from the Sharks persevering and forcing this game into overtime.

 

That is the play that everyone will remember.

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sharks getting some good luck, but I think they are better equipped to beat the Bruins so...

 

It looked like it wasn't an intentional hand pass. He batted it down and tried to make a play on it himself but he didn't. I like these Sharks but I hate that they have been winning with so much controversy. 

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

47 minutes ago, Big C said:

Sharks getting some good luck, but I think they are better equipped to beat the Bruins so...

 

It looked like it wasn't an intentional hand pass. He batted it down and tried to make a play on it himself but he didn't. I like these Sharks but I hate that they have been winning with so much controversy. 

Intentional has nothing to do with it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, BigMcD said:

Intentional has nothing to do with it. 

 

I am aware. I can see how the refs may have missed it because in real time it could have looked like he batted the puck down and swatted it with his stick. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How is that play not reviewable?  It's just embarassing for the NHL to have a replay system in place that makes a hand pass that leads to a goal unreviewable.  It's a shame too because it was a great game and comeback in the last minute by the Sharks.

Edited by Doc Brown
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just saw a replay. That is the most blatant thing I have seen. (Yes I realize intent doesn't matter, but at full speed it was obvious). Wow. That needs to be reviewable, no doubt. Really though, I don't care if it's the third OT of game 7 of the finals, that needs to be called. It's just like Offside for a linesman.  Hand passes are not a usual put your whistle in your pocket non call.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, May Day 10 said:

Please, no more reviewable plays

i would do away with replay in all sports..hate it. 

 

unfortunately, this will not lead to way more in the NHL..including all 5-minute majors.

 

Wonder if  they will always include a replay for a major not called?

 

@Dante, man do your  boys gut a rabbit foot stuffed up their arse this playoff year

  • Awesome! (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...