haroldsnepsts
-
Content Count
14,265 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
87
Everything posted by haroldsnepsts
-
Z's line has really not been clicking. There's been some good plays on individual efforts, but I don't remember a whole lot of tic-tac-toe playmaking. or even tic-tac for that matter. And hey, Cheli as another healthy scratch. Hopefully I'll be eating my words in the playoffs, but right now re-signing Chelios has been the waste of a roster spot I thought it would be.
-
Me too. It'd be too bad to lose Hossa, but with essentially the same lineup as last year, but Luongo between the pipes, I think this team would be even scarier than they are with Hossa.
-
Here's a shot closer at ice level. The pucks not at the stick yet, but to me it makes it an even closer call.
-
You're using lines drawn on an image that is shooting down and diagonal at the play. That doesn't clear it up at all. It's flawed analysis. Especially if you consider that the lens of the camera would compress the spatial relationship, depending on how zoomed in it was. The only way it'd even be possible to draw conclusions like that from a still image would be if the camera were shooting at exact crossbar height. And even then, it's still going to come down to a judgement call.
-
(borrowed from a post at hfboards) Or you can watch the goal highlight on NHL.com. The Youtube clip cuts away, but the ref clearly signals goal.
-
Actually if you look a the screen caps, it's pretty clear his stick is below his shoulders. Either way, it was a close call, but was signaled a goal on the ice. It's gonna stand as a goal unless it's a pretty obvious high stick, no matter who tipped it in.
-
that's the problem when they changed the ruling on high sticks. It used to be above the shoulders, the downside being that it wasn't standard and varied on the height of the player, which doesn't make a lot of sense. But it had the big advantage that the shoulders were always very close to the stick and puck and made for a lot clearer calls when ruling on goals.
-
It's not really out of line for the team captain to go to the ref in a situation like that.
-
They just had an interview with Crosby about the goal, I'm guessing you won't believe him but he says he was trying to find out the ruling when he was talking to the ref, and even says he thought his top hand might've been above the crossbar but knew that the bottom part was on an angle down, so maybe that saved him. Basically it sounds like he wasn't even sure.
-
Much like the Sabres players who were signalling high stick and pleading with the ref? I'm going frame for frame on my DVR right now. The stick is clearly below his shoulders, but as for the crossbar, it's pretty close when the puck actually contacts his stick. Might've been above, might not. When it's that close, they're gonna call it a goal, no matter whose name is on the back of the jersey, whether it's Beauchemin or Crosby.
-
Well seeing as how it started with the ridiculous premise that the goal was allowed because it was Crosby, where else was there for the thread to go? Seriously. I can't believe there's people so obsessed with him here. You'd think we lost to the Pens in the playoffs last year instead of won the Stanley Cup.
-
Exactly. BUT OMG It was cindy crosby!! it's a leaugue conspiracy by Bettman for his golden boy!!!! So I guess there's a conspiracy to promote Beuchemin as well?? The Crosby goal wasn't that clear. Unless it's a ridiculously hight stick, these days in the new NHL, they're gonna count the goal. EDIT: and even if the call was blown, it had nothing to do with Crosby. seriously. break out the tin foil hats.
-
Agreed. This Crosby fixation is getting a little pathetic. You guys (not you Gordie) seriously need to take a step back and try and look objectively at your obsession with Crosby. It's hilarious that one of the biggest complaints from Crosby haters is all the hype and attention he gets, yet those same people obsess over any little thing he does on the ice.
-
I don't think he was calling for a penalty. Just with how tightly the game had been called, he's lucky he didn't get a penalty, I assume, for roughing. I agree that the puck was right there and it really wouldn't have been interference. But he did throw a forearm. They'd called guys for a lot less earlier in the game, that's all.
-
Extremely inconsistent both ways. called some really weak stuff at the start, and let some calls go later on. Kronwall's lucky he didn't get a penalty on that forearm he threw there.
-
I'd still take him over Lebda in a heartbeat. He really only had a role in one of those goals that I saw.
-
I've said it so many times I should make it my signature. Once again the Wings offensive firepower bails out their sloppy defensive effort.
-
Lids is having a great game tonight. that was a nice pass play Lids to Flip to Hudler.
-
Agreed. total lack of consistency by the refs.
-
Yeah. They've probably become my second favorite team. Not a ton of talent, but some great young players, and tons of heart. Usually though they hit more than this. Not that I'd really want them to against the Wings, but they've got some great hitters on their team and play physical in the corners. Like the Wings, they've had some shaky goaltending. They just don't have the offensive firepower to compensate for it.
-
okay. now I've noticed Hossa.
-
who was that who totally bit on the faked shot?
-
This has been one of the few games where I haven't really noticed Hossa out there.
-
refs rarely call that. I definitely think they should more though. Edit: the delay of game for holding the puck. not Homer's trip.
-
someone didn't have their man on the backcheck. Dats?
