Keirik Posted June 23, 2022 Share Posted June 23, 2022 1 hour ago, Nashley Tisdale said: All the goals have 6 COL on the ice. 35 is the goalie... You do realize it shows 7 there right ? 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cash or Czech Posted June 23, 2022 Share Posted June 23, 2022 If 5 is on for 6, and 5 doesn’t impact the play, I don’t think there’s an issue? It’s a loose interpretation, but Tampa also got a huge benefit on the helmetless goalie. I don’t think they can really expect to get both sides and whine about it 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Abe Froman Posted June 23, 2022 Share Posted June 23, 2022 Can we have more cheese for Coopers whine please? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Karan Posted June 23, 2022 Share Posted June 23, 2022 2 hours ago, Nashley Tisdale said: All the goals have 6 COL on the ice. 35 is the goalie... The game sheet screenshot posted lists 6 skaters + the goalie lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flynn Posted June 23, 2022 Share Posted June 23, 2022 I vividly remember Cooper adamantly trying to have the league overturn their goal vs. the Isles last year when they had 7 men on the ice.... Wait.. I'm being told Cooper didn't say shit. Fuck Cooper Fuck Tampa Fuck Florida Fuck em all. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Posted June 23, 2022 Share Posted June 23, 2022 4 hours ago, jsm7302 said: The fact that their first goal was scored on a goalie with no helmet, makes me think they shouldn't complain. 1 hour ago, Cash or Czech said: If 5 is on for 6, and 5 doesn’t impact the play, I don’t think there’s an issue? It’s a loose interpretation, but Tampa also got a huge benefit on the helmetless goalie. I don’t think they can really expect to get both sides and whine about it They got the call right on TB's goal with the helmetless goalie according to the rule. I'm not sure that's a break when they get things right. Although getting things right is becoming less the norm these days. Regardless of what teams are playing it's pathetic how poorly games are officiated (OT goal). 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jsm7302 Posted June 23, 2022 Share Posted June 23, 2022 12 minutes ago, jsrangers said: They got the call right on TB's goal with the helmetless goalie according to the rule. I'm not sure that's a break when they get things right. Although getting things right is becoming less the norm these days. Regardless of what teams are playing it's pathetic how poorly games are officiated (OT goal). Thanks for that. I dont agree with that rule at all. The goalie is apt to protect his nut over stopping the puck so if the helmet comes off unintentionally regardless who has the puck, play should be dead. BUT you bring up a good point that the goal was good according to the rulebook regardless whether I like it or not. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fletch Posted June 23, 2022 Share Posted June 23, 2022 Interesting spin, bold added by me: https://www.nhl.com/news/colorado-avalanche-tampa-bay-lightning-game-4-recap/c-334547836 NHL Hockey Operations issued a statement on Kadri's goal following the game: "A too many men on the ice penalty is a judgment call that can be made by any of the four on-ice officials. Following the game, Hockey Operations met with the four officials as is their normal protocol. In discussing the winning goal, each of the four officials advised that they did not see a too many men on the ice situation on the play. This call is not subject to video review either by Hockey Ops or the on-ice officials." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Morphinity 2.0 Posted June 23, 2022 Share Posted June 23, 2022 5 hours ago, Keirik said: You do realize it shows 7 there right ? Don't correct me again or you're banned. 1 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sod16 Posted June 23, 2022 Share Posted June 23, 2022 Too many men is like offside: missed as often as it is caught when it is close. I imagine we will now have a push to make it reviewable, at least where a goal has been scored. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fletch Posted June 23, 2022 Share Posted June 23, 2022 The gold standard for controversy for me is the 1999 Stanley Cup Final in Game 6 when they counted the Brett Hull goal in triple OT although his foot was in the crease, and that had been a disallowed goal all season. That goal ended the series so there was no way for the Sabres to come back. https://buffalonews.com/opinion/columnists/20-years-later-sabres-no-goal-drama-is-huge-disappointment-for-hasek/article_566f98e7-e0fa-5b37-bdd1-f084fd6a8846.html 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jsm7302 Posted June 23, 2022 Share Posted June 23, 2022 1 hour ago, fletch said: Interesting spin, bold added by me: https://www.nhl.com/news/colorado-avalanche-tampa-bay-lightning-game-4-recap/c-334547836 NHL Hockey Operations issued a statement on Kadri's goal following the game: "A too many men on the ice penalty is a judgment call that can be made by any of the four on-ice officials. Following the game, Hockey Operations met with the four officials as is their normal protocol. In discussing the winning goal, each of the four officials advised that they did not see a too many men on the ice situation on the play. This call is not subject to video review either by Hockey Ops or the on-ice officials." Hahaha all penalties are judgement calls. IMO if the extra man goes on while the other player is going off and the play is not near either player and neither touch the puck until there are five on the ice, then what the hell difference does it make?! I watched this a number of times and there were the proper number of guys on the ice when Kadri touched the puck. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Jimmy Posted June 23, 2022 Share Posted June 23, 2022 Ok, so they call the penalty, the Avs serve it and bury the game winner as soon as they're back at ES. Tampa was absolutely gassed in that OT. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fletch Posted June 23, 2022 Share Posted June 23, 2022 https://www.espn.com/nhl/story/_/id/34136852/colorado-avalanche-coach-jared-bednar-says-no-controversy-surrounding-nazem-kadri-game-4-winning-goal Bednar said he watched the footage too but didn't see anything wrong with how Colorado executed. "I thought it was nothing, honestly," he said Thursday. "That's part of the game. It's a fluid game. You're changing on the fly, everything happens. You look at that clip, you back that clip up -- and I did multiple times just to see what they were talking about -- and Tampa's got two guys jumping on with their D coming off the ice from a zone away. I count 7-6 at one point. So that is what it is. That's the way the game is played. I don't see it as a break or no-break. I actually see it as nothing." 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sod16 Posted June 24, 2022 Share Posted June 24, 2022 8 hours ago, fletch said: The gold standard for controversy for me is the 1999 Stanley Cup Final in Game 6 when they counted the Brett Hull goal in triple OT although his foot was in the crease, and that had been a disallowed goal all season. That goal ended the series so there was no way for the Sabres to come back. https://buffalonews.com/opinion/columnists/20-years-later-sabres-no-goal-drama-is-huge-disappointment-for-hasek/article_566f98e7-e0fa-5b37-bdd1-f084fd6a8846.html And that resulted in a push to change the rule. Unfortunately, they pretty much went from one extreme to the other, and now, the crease is pretty much irrelevant unless you come in contact with the goalie, even though the rule only requires that you interfere with him playing his position, which you certainly can do without hitting him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrooksBurner Posted June 24, 2022 Share Posted June 24, 2022 (edited) These kinds of calls should be reviewable. Kadri was all the way on the other side of the ice receiving the puck before MacKinnon finally got off. It was way too much time between Kadri going on and MacKinnon getting off. And not even time, distance. MacKinnon wasn’t next to the bench just waiting to get off through a bench door. He was in the middle of the ice in the OZ. Not even close. If you watch the replay Nichuskin was relatively close and looked like he might be getting off. Then he curled and stayed on. Maybe that’s who Kadri thought was coming off for him. I also don’t care in this case because Tampa has gotten an insane amount of these kinds of breaks their way for a while now. They deserve to get fucked over. Edited June 24, 2022 by rmc51 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fletch Posted June 24, 2022 Share Posted June 24, 2022 On 6/23/2022 at 12:05 AM, jsrangers said: The difference in review of an offsides is that either all players were behind the blue line when the puck carrier entered, or similar rules permutations. Closest to clear cut. Similar to whether a puck crosses a line for a good goal, or whether a stoppage was missed because the puck hit the net out of play. In contrast, whether a goal was scored with a clear kicking motion. Using the replay, but still a judgement call. Line changes can involve a bunch of players leaving/entering the ice. Referee discretion as to when a too many men situation occurs. They review head-shots to see if 5 minute penalties should be reduced to two minute penalties. In the case of too many men you are hoping to take care of egregious misses, but you're asking Toronto to interpret whether a referee used proper judgement in not calling a penalty - and then perhaps imposing a penalty!?! Seems messy. https://www.msn.com/en-us/sports/nhl/too-many-men-on-the-ice-explained-why-the-nhls-judgment-call-penalty-can-be-so-controversial/ar-AAYN3gq What is a too many men on the ice penalty? Under the NHL rulebook, according to Rule 74.1, too many men on the ice is defined to be: Players may be changed at any time during the play from the players’ bench provided that the player or players leaving the ice shall be within five feet (5') of his players’ bench and out of the play before the change is made. Refer also to Rule 71 – Premature Substitution. At the discretion of the on-ice officials, should a substituting player come onto the ice before his teammate is within the five foot (5’) limit of the players’ bench (and therefore clearly causing his team to have too many players on the ice), then a bench minor penalty may be assessed. When a player is retiring from the ice surface and is within the five foot (5’) limit of his players’ bench, and his substitute is on the ice, then the retiring player shall be considered off the ice for the purpose of Rule 70 – Leaving Bench. The key phrasing in the rulebook is that it is up to "the discretion of the on-ice officials," meaning that ultimately the play is a judgment call. It's not clear-cut black and white, there is a grey area that can cause some confusion. https://thehockeywriters.com/hockey-101-too-many-men/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cash or Czech Posted June 25, 2022 Share Posted June 25, 2022 Cooper’s gonna bitch about that goal after he thinks it shouldn’t have been icing. *eye roll* Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Abe Froman Posted June 25, 2022 Share Posted June 25, 2022 Zebras still helping Coop and his boys. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Abe Froman Posted June 25, 2022 Share Posted June 25, 2022 Gotta keep that threepeat storyline going. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Karan Posted June 25, 2022 Share Posted June 25, 2022 Of course they won't call a delay-of-game on TBL as Vasy tosses off his mask while COL is in full possession of the puck lol 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blue Heaven Posted June 25, 2022 Share Posted June 25, 2022 My god the officiating is HORRENDOUS 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Karan Posted June 25, 2022 Share Posted June 25, 2022 No officiating standard whatsoever. They're re-writing the rulebook on the fly here. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Abe Froman Posted June 25, 2022 Share Posted June 25, 2022 I guess "Coop" decides what's a penalty or not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keirik Posted June 25, 2022 Share Posted June 25, 2022 Makar is the McJesus of defensemen 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now