• Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

Sign in to follow this  
puckloo39

3/22 GDT : Blues 1 at Red Wings 2 (OT)

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

It is funny. We were happy to leave the west cause we were finding it easier to play against Eastern teams but now that we're here we're better against Western teams

6-0 against Nashville, St. Louis and Chicago this season. Can't beat Montreal or Tampa Bay for anything, though.

I think I'll still pass on those 10:30 start times.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Didn't have a chance to watch the game, but glad they got the win. How'd we look? I see the refs helped us out a little on the OT winner.

When will the league, Bettman, the refs, etc. be held accountable for their Red Wings bias? I mean, first the Dallas game and now this? Lol.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My thoughts...

I thought it was a pretty entertaining game. Not as intense as our game against the Jets the other night, but it was a good game.

Blues fans, including myself, are obviously a bit frustrated at the types of goals that went in against us (especially after 5 of the 6 goals the Wild scored on us on Saturday were goofy goals as well). The shot off of Butler's face that squirts right to Cole who chips it in with a wedge, and of course the goal that shouldn't have counted by Abdelkader in OT. It really is a joke that that kind of play isn't reviewable. We discussed this at length last night on our podcast about it being a clear no goal that isn't subjective at all.

I know the league doesn't want the war room getting into the business of calling penalties (they've said as much), which is what would have happened if they were able to review the goal...goal is waived off and Abdelkader goes in the box for playing the puck with a broken stick and it's 3 on 3 with the Blues getting a short PP after that. But why shouldn't they call penalties on plays like that? I think especially in situations where a goal is scored, it should be a reviewable play. But even if you think the war room shouldn't be calling penalties, they could at least say that goals scored with a possible broken stick are reviewable plays, but no penalty will be granted and the faceoff goes down to the other end or something. Of course, I'm sure you'll get guys bolting to the bench to hide the broken stick after scoring a goal with it...but with all of the cameras out there, they couldn't get away with that very easily.

The sad part is that Toronto did review the goal. They review every goal to make sure it's legit. So they very much indeed saw that the goal shouldn't have counted...but they couldn't say anything about it.

That's just wrong.

It might be a while before you see a goal like that again...they aren't common. But it wouldn't hurt to have that rule in the rulebook just in case. The NHL doesn't want the Stanley Cup decided on another goal that shouldn't have counted.

I think you guys can understand that we feel we deserved a better fate in this game. Just got a bit unlucky on the first goal, and then flat out hosed on the 2nd goal.

But hey, maybe we can get some revenge when we meet the Wings in the finals. I know that I speak for just about every Blues fan when I say that I would LOVE to meet the Wings in the finals. (but let's be honest...we'd love for the Blues to meet anyone in the finals)

Good game

Good game

Good game

Good game

F*ck you

Good game

Good game

;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My thoughts...

I thought it was a pretty entertaining game. Not as intense as our game against the Jets the other night, but it was a good game.

Blues fans, including myself, are obviously a bit frustrated at the types of goals that went in against us (especially after 5 of the 6 goals the Wild scored on us on Saturday were goofy goals as well). The shot off of Butler's face that squirts right to Cole who chips it in with a wedge, and of course the goal that shouldn't have counted by Abdelkader in OT. It really is a joke that that kind of play isn't reviewable. We discussed this at length last night on our podcast about it being a clear no goal that isn't subjective at all.

I know the league doesn't want the war room getting into the business of calling penalties (they've said as much), which is what would have happened if they were able to review the goal...goal is waived off and Abdelkader goes in the box for playing the puck with a broken stick and it's 3 on 3 with the Blues getting a short PP after that. But why shouldn't they call penalties on plays like that? I think especially in situations where a goal is scored, it should be a reviewable play. But even if you think the war room shouldn't be calling penalties, they could at least say that goals scored with a possible broken stick are reviewable plays, but no penalty will be granted and the faceoff goes down to the other end or something. Of course, I'm sure you'll get guys bolting to the bench to hide the broken stick after scoring a goal with it...but with all of the cameras out there, they couldn't get away with that very easily.

The sad part is that Toronto did review the goal. They review every goal to make sure it's legit. So they very much indeed saw that the goal shouldn't have counted...but they couldn't say anything about it.

That's just wrong.

It might be a while before you see a goal like that again...they aren't common. But it wouldn't hurt to have that rule in the rulebook just in case. The NHL doesn't want the Stanley Cup decided on another goal that shouldn't have counted.

I think you guys can understand that we feel we deserved a better fate in this game. Just got a bit unlucky on the first goal, and then flat out hosed on the 2nd goal.

But hey, maybe we can get some revenge when we meet the Wings in the finals. I know that I speak for just about every Blues fan when I say that I would LOVE to meet the Wings in the finals. (but let's be honest...we'd love for the Blues to meet anyone in the finals)

Good game

Good game

Good game

Good game

F*ck you

Good game

Good game

;)

If they determined Abdelkader purposely played the puck with a broken stick it would've been a 4 on 4 because his stick was slashed. To me it was a quick play that would've been hard to determine if he did it on purpose.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If they determined Abdelkader purposely played the puck with a broken stick it would've been a 4 on 4 because his stick was slashed. To me it was a quick play that would've been hard to determine if he did it on purpose.

His stick wasn't slashed. At least not causing his stick to break.

Abby broke it on Allen's pad while trying to get his stick in front of the net to tap the puck in.

The goal shouldn't have counted, but it did and it's nice to get a call in our favor after the Glendening goalie interference call in Washington earlier this season.

I'm not shedding any tears for the Blues or their fans.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Did Babs clear the bench after the goal went in? Seen him do that on possible questionable OT goals before. It's a smart move. Celebrate then hit the dressing room. Goals won't be called back after that. "Ummm guys, I know your skates are already off and fans are leaving, but you have to come back out and finish the game, the goal did'nt count". Never happen.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Did Babs clear the bench after the goal went in? Seen him do that on possible questionable OT goals before. It's a smart move. Celebrate then hit the dressing room. Goals won't be called back after that. "Ummm guys, I know your skates are already off and fans are leaving, but you have to come back out and finish the game, the goal did'nt count". Never happen.

I'm pretty sure they have done it before. I think it was a shootout and the rangers, but they called the team back from the dressing room to continue the shootout

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm pretty sure they have done it before. I think it was a shootout and the rangers, but they called the team back from the dressing room to continue the shootout

Weird. Those musta been some pretty determined refs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I never really understood the can't play the puck with a broken stick rule. It doesn't give the player any kind of advantage of his stick is broken

It's more of a player safety thing, they don't want people swinging around jagged pieces of metal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is no argument, the goal shouldn't have counted, it was missed, take the gift and move on. Those arguing that it should have counted anyway are wrong.

In terms of clearing the ice quickly as if you got away with something...they may do that, but if there is a review.....the team having left the ice would have 0% bearing on any decision. If the wrong call was made (and the play is reviewable, in this case it's not), the team would be called back to the ice....even if they are all showering.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

People do realize Nyquist is a pass first type of guy right?

That's a pretty tenuous characterization for a guy who has 54 goals, and 55 assists in his short NHL career. Joe Thornton is "pass first". Valterri Filppula is "pass first". I think it would be misleading to describe Nyquist's game in a similar fashion. So far in his short career he's been a significantly better finisher than most NHLers.

Edited by kipwinger

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In terms of clearing the ice quickly as if you got away with something...they may do that, but if there is a review.....the team having left the ice would have 0% bearing on any decision. If the wrong call was made (and the play is reviewable, in this case it's not), the team would be called back to the ice....even if they are all showering

I know they could be called back out. Just meant how often do you see that happen? If the coach knows they got away with something, it's good to get to the dressing room and take the chance rather than sit there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this