warwick.hoy said:
Not a surprise they are done this quick. The east is where the deap hockey us played.
Enjoy the benefits of a premium membership!
Upgrade Account
-
TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
Join free Log in
Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.
The Official 2012 NHL Stanely Cup Finals Thread
- Thread starter warwick.hoy
- Start date
- Status
Not a surprise they are done this quick. The east is where the deap hockey us played.
NHL Rules - [Invalid or Expired Link Removed]
78.5 Disallowed Goals – Apparent goals shall be disallowed by the Referee and the appropriate announcement made by the Public Address Announcer for the following reasons:
(i) When the puck has been directed, batted or thrown into the net by an attacking player other than with a stick.
(ii) When the puck has been kicked using a distinct kicking motion.
I would agree that contact with the puck was not made because it was under Lunquist's stick. But sub-section (i) still applies in my book. The puck was directed into the net while under Lundquist's stick by the distinct kicking motion, which equates to "directed into the net by an attacking player other than with a stick." 100% in my mind.
Apparently, that aspect of the play was eligible for review in Toronto but they disagree with my assessment. I'm not sure why. To me, it was absolutely conclusive that the puck was directed into the net by an attacking player other than with a stick. (Or is the rule ambiguous enough to think that the offensive player can use the goalie's stick??? I would think not).
What was not reviewable was Neal's interference with Lundquist by sticking him out of the crease while illegally directing the puck into the net by an attacking player other than with a stick.
Two strikes on the NHL. One to the refs and the other to the offices in Toronto who apparently haven't read their rules in a while.
Caveat: apparently the GM meetings resulted in some rules changes. I don't know if the link I posted (the latest I could find) reflects those.
I'm a B's fan, so I couldn't give two real craps, but I like things to be done right.
Wishful thinking if I'm honest.
Not seeing the context of the goal I withhold comment on this particular incident.
I'm a traditionalist, but frankly if they had any brains they would just allow goals that are kicked in. "Distinct kicking motion"? So if it goes in off your foot by accident, it counts, if you do it on purpose, it doesn't. That's dumb. Besides, in this day & age it's a miracle any goals get scored at all.
It's not dumb. It's to prevent players from kicking their skates around in front of the net and prevents injury in an area where people are usually down on the ice. It makes perfect sense to me as why the rule is in place.
Why don't you ask Malarchuk where his sense of adventure is? Obviously this didn't happen from someone trying to kick the puck in, but it is exactly what this rule tries to prevent.
Clint Malarchuk gets throat slit by skate - YouTube
I'm not clicking on that. I remember watching that the day it happened, no need to re-visit that.
Anyway, I doubt it would turn every player who entered the crease into Pele, but I've been wrong before.
Anyway, I doubt it would turn every player who entered the crease into Pele, but I've been wrong before.
Not exactly sure who interfered with Lundqvist last night. I don't think Neal was the primary one that drew him out of the net, I think I saw one of his own players contribute to that, unfortunately I can't watch video here at work to see who it was.
If I remember about the goal though, not only did Lundqvist's stick hit that puck, but his glove did as well before it crossed the goal line which may have played into how Toronto called that goal. One would love to have a live webcam in that room during the playoffs. Hey, NHL, any chance of this happening? Didn't think so.
I agree about kicking with the skates around the goal, that is dangerous stuff and players can get seriously injured. Unfortunately, it happens with regularity.
If I remember about the goal though, not only did Lundqvist's stick hit that puck, but his glove did as well before it crossed the goal line which may have played into how Toronto called that goal. One would love to have a live webcam in that room during the playoffs. Hey, NHL, any chance of this happening? Didn't think so.
I agree about kicking with the skates around the goal, that is dangerous stuff and players can get seriously injured. Unfortunately, it happens with regularity.
And it is not just about safety, but also about giving the defensemen a chance to defend. If a player is trying to put the puck in with their stick, the D man can make a stick on stick play. If they are trying to kick it in, making a play on their skate with their stick would be illegal.
And strength when you think more about it. How much stronger are our legs than the arms? Poor goalie!
(of course when Chara cranks up that 108MPH slapper...
)
(of course when Chara cranks up that 108MPH slapper...
)
My takeaway image from the PHI/PIT series is Jagr fighting off Dupuis then passing to Giroux for the goal. That was most excellent. Only way to make that better would have been Talbot scoring the goal.
-Mike
-Mike
I'd say with five guys collapsing in the crease like they do, they have more than enough opportunity to defend. Maybe getting booted in the face will make them think twice about sprawling around in the crease.....
(I'm kidding, of course.)
(I'm kidding, of course.)
I agree with you Mike that play from Jagr was excellent!
My takeaway from the Philadelphia/Pittsburgh series was the first shift of Game 6 with Claude Giroux. He set the tone for the game on that shift. After his frustration and anger shown at the end of Game 5 with the stick smashing incident, he came ready to play.
5 seconds in, crush Crosby along the boards in front of the Pittsburgh bench. 27 seconds later, put a laser blast past Fleury to open the scoring.
Here's some background on Giroux and Game 6:
Invalid Link Removed
Claude Giroux leads Philadelphia Flyers past the Penguins and into Round 2 - Yahoo! Sports
My takeaway from the Philadelphia/Pittsburgh series was the first shift of Game 6 with Claude Giroux. He set the tone for the game on that shift. After his frustration and anger shown at the end of Game 5 with the stick smashing incident, he came ready to play.
5 seconds in, crush Crosby along the boards in front of the Pittsburgh bench. 27 seconds later, put a laser blast past Fleury to open the scoring.
Here's some background on Giroux and Game 6:
Invalid Link Removed
Claude Giroux leads Philadelphia Flyers past the Penguins and into Round 2 - Yahoo! Sports
BTW, last night was the first I saw any of the Chicago/Phoenix series. I LOVE Smith's mask!!! Wile E. Coyote!
One thing that keeps rattling around in my big dumb head is the comment Crosby made about his hatred for all of the Flyers players. As a professional athlete in a sport where players are traded from team to team on a regular basis, that kind of comment seems especially moronic. There is a good chance that sometime in the years to come, Crosby will be wearing the same jersey as more than one of the current members of the Flyers team. Way to be classy, kid.
I don't really take issue with that. The Pens don't like the Flyers, the Flyers don't like the Penguins. It is not a secret. Maybe he was trying to rile up his team as the captain. In the end, the series ended with both teams shaking hands, and you could tell there was a great deal of respect for each other on both sides. You can not like someone and still respect them.
Crosby's comment and the like happen all the time. I posted in the last NHL thread I think about a name Pronger used to call Jagr when they played against each other. (forget what it was now) Puffnuts! This year they played together and laughed about it. If Crosby winds up playing with Hartnell someday, I'm sure they'll get along. It's just the omcpetitiveness of athletes.
- Status
