NHL Playoffs - SECOND Round

[Scottie]

Oh, this won't be popular

But it's the right call. Too bad for Chicago; that was a helluva shot by Hjalmarsson. Right before that non-goal, one of the Wings fell down on his own blue line; didn't have any help at all, he just fell. He took forever to get up. That's tired.

If those two aren't wrestling up near center ice, another tired sign, this game is over.

[howard]

Right before that non-goal, one of the Wings fell down on his own blue line;

That is what I figured you meant by bad ice--a bulging blue line.

[degenerasian]

Oh, this won't be popular

ETA: exactly what did Saad do? Is being a punching bag a 2:00 minor?

I think he threw one punch when he was down on the ice.

[howard]

Yeah, I saw that, but as return for getting blasted, bent over the board into the Red Wings' bench, thrown down, punched, and kicked in the head, you should get one free punch from your ass.

[Scottie]

ETA: exactly what did Saad do? Is being a punching bag a 2:00 minor?

Nah, they were both guilty there. Off-setting minor penalties was the right call. Quincey's helmet didn't rip itself off his head. Really, though, less than two-minutes to go in a tied game seven and those two are playing waltzing matilda a hundred feet from the play? No excuse for that.

And, yeah, Howard. I didn't catch which player it was but guys have been catching skate edges and falling down all night, especially late in periods. Bad ice. Bad ice plus tired guys is a tough shift.

CBC replay shows (or let's us hear) that the whistle went before Hjalmarsson even shot. The pass was just on its way to him when it went.

[Steve of phpBB]

Fuck that. It's basically a technical foul, you don't blow the whistle as the play is developing.

[degenerasian]

This is the stupid rules of hockey sometimes. The refs will never ever ever call a single penalty that late in the game, especially a game 7. It's really the only sport that does this.

In football if it's pass interference on 4th down or the last play of the game, it's pass interference. Ask the Miami Hurricanes.

Hockey is like woooooooooooooooah, we don't want to put a team on the PP and decide the game.

[Scottie]

Fuck that. It's basically a technical foul, you don't blow the whistle as the play is developing.

On a delayed penalty the play continues until the offending team touches the puck. On delayed offsets it gets called when the team of the player that committed the initial infraction gets control of the puck. The latter is pretty much exactly what happened. The official looked like he was content to just tell them to knock it off and move on, which happens all the time, but those two twits just kept going at it. That also happens all the time. When a fight breaks out behind the play? Officials whistle play down. They don't say "hang on, someone might score here".

[howard]

ETA: exactly what did Saad do? Is being a punching bag a 2:00 minor?

Quincey's helmet didn't rip itself off his head.

I missed that completely. Guess they were both trying to dance the lead.

[howard]

Does Boland get an assist for that hit? Seabrook picks up the turnover, and handshakes.

[Rush2112]

Hooray! Our national nightmare is over the Red Wings won't win the Cup! Hooray!!

Hockeytown my ass.

[degenerasian]

ETA: exactly what did Saad do? Is being a punching bag a 2:00 minor?

Nah, they were both guilty there. Off-setting minor penalties was the right call. Quincey's helmet didn't rip itself off his head. Really, though, less than two-minutes to go in a tied game seven and those two are playing waltzing matilda a hundred feet from the play? No excuse for that.

And, yeah, Howard. I didn't catch which player it was but guys have been catching skate edges and falling down all night, especially late in periods. Bad ice. Bad ice plus tired guys is a tough shift.

CBC replay shows (or let's us hear) that the whistle went before Hjalmarsson even shot. The pass was just on its way to him when it went.

i don;t know scottie.

Quincey's helmet was knocked off while Saad was on his back on the boards being pushed into the bench. Pretty safe to assume at that point putting your arms in the air in an attempt to push the mugger off of you it's not really roughing and more "trying not to fall head first into the bench".

[Scottie]

Does Boland get an assist for that hit? Seabrook picks up the turnover, and handshakes.

Yeah, Bolland gets the lone assist.

Last Red Wings playoff game in Western Conference history, that.

[brian]

Best team won the series, so there's that. Glad all of the Wings' pups got so much experience including two road Game 7's. Onward to a full season and a new conference.

(Also, Chicago and Pittsburgh is going to be a GREAT Finals.)

[Scottie]

Quincey's helmet was knocked off while Saad was on his back on the boards being pushed into the bench. Pretty safe to assume at that point putting your arms in the air in an attempt to push the mugger off of you it's not really roughing and more "trying not to fall head first into the bench".

Officials prefer to call off-setting penalties that late in the game rather than give a team an advantage. Whether any of us agree with the call, fact is the whistle went before Hjalmarsson (fuck I hate trying to type that) had or shot the puck. When the whistle goes, players let up. As perhaps Detroit's goalie Howard may have before the shot.

When a guy is getting thrown over the boards like that, an official has to whistle the play down. I don't even think the guy that called it (Walkom?) was looking in the direction of the puck, just at Quincey and Saad.

[Steve of phpBB]

Fucking A.

I have a three-week trial starting Tuesday, so I haven't seen any of the games of this series until now. And I don't know if I'll be able to watch any time soon. So I'm really glad I could watch this one start to finish:

[degenerasian]

Quincey's helmet was knocked off while Saad was on his back on the boards being pushed into the bench. Pretty safe to assume at that point putting your arms in the air in an attempt to push the mugger off of you it's not really roughing and more "trying not to fall head first into the bench".

Officials prefer to call off-setting penalties that late in the game rather than give a team an advantage. Whether any of us agree with the call, fact is the whistle went before Hjalmarsson (fuck I hate trying to type that) had or shot the puck. When the whistle goes, players let up. As perhaps Detroit's goalie Howard may have before the shot.

When a guy is getting thrown over the boards like that, an official has to whistle the play down. I don't even think the guy that called it (Walkom?) was looking in the direction of the puck, just at Quincey and Saad.

Again, this is unique to hockey and it's a problem. During a scrum in the first period when both guys are 'infracting' the refs do not hesitate to send just one guy off to send a message. But if there's anything going on late or in overtime the opposite happens, no matter how one-sided it is, both guys will go off.

The refs decide the games by trying not to decide the games. This is why it's impossible for comebacks in the NHL because the team falls behind due to a PP goal in the 1st period, can't get that PP back in the 3rd because the refereeing standard is different. In the Kings-Sharks series, the team that scored first won all 7 games. In the Detroit-Chicago series 6 out of 7 (only Game 2 Hawks scored first and lost)

[Gunpowder]

This is the stupid rules of hockey sometimes. The refs will never ever ever call a single penalty that late in the game, especially a game 7. It's really the only sport that does this.

In football if it's pass interference on 4th down or the last play of the game, it's pass interference. Ask the Miami Hurricanes.

Hockey is like woooooooooooooooah, we don't want to put a team on the PP and decide the game.

In football there is a lot of whistle swallowing on 4th down, regardless of one example. I cite the Penguins clinching a playoff game a few years back in OT on a 5-3 power play.

Also, basketball refs let things go as well. Hockey is not unique in this regard.

[degenerasian]

This is the stupid rules of hockey sometimes. The refs will never ever ever call a single penalty that late in the game, especially a game 7. It's really the only sport that does this.

In football if it's pass interference on 4th down or the last play of the game, it's pass interference. Ask the Miami Hurricanes.

Hockey is like woooooooooooooooah, we don't want to put a team on the PP and decide the game.

In football there is a lot of whistle swallowing on 4th down, regardless of one example. I cite the Penguins clinching a playoff game a few years back in OT on a 5-3 power play.

Also, basketball refs let things go as well. Hockey is not unique in this regard.

Perhaps I just see more calls. My memory escapes me but I remember late calls in those Chargers-Jets playoff classics in the past, including a roughing the passer slap to the head penalty. I've seen holding penalties take teams out of field goal range and PI penalties put them into field goal range or illegal contact extend the final drive. Penalties happen on both sides late in games.

In hockey it just seems that with 5 minutes to go and OT anyone can do whatever they want. Most OT powerplays are the result of delay of game penalties.

[BSF21]

I saw two problems. Granted a little bit of homerism but...

1) Saad appeared to do very little to instigate that, then got shoved into the bench, then got thrown to the ice, then threw a punch as the Wing's player was on top of him. If you want to call that offsetting, well you're wrong, but even if you do, there has to be some acknowledgement that the guy who was 90% the receiver and 10% the offender should not receive the same penalty. I don't know if you want to make it an x2 minor or a 5 min call on the other guy but that simply cannot be 2 minutes apiece.

2) Why is there no rule in hockey to play advantage? When there is an offense away from the play, not committed DIRECTLY by the attacking team, play continues. Don't tell me he had to blow that dead. Put your arm up and let the play develop. It was poorly done.

Either way hell of a game. Had my heart in my throat for much of last evening.

[degenerasian]

I saw two problems. Granted a little bit of homerism but...

1) Saad appeared to do very little to instigate that, then got shoved into the bench, then got thrown to the ice, then threw a punch as the Wing's player was on top of him. If you want to call that offsetting, well you're wrong, but even if you do, there has to be some acknowledgement that the guy who was 90% the receiver and 10% the offender should not receive the same penalty. I don't know if you want to make it an x2 minor or a 5 min call on the other guy but that simply cannot be 2 minutes apiece.

2) Why is there no rule in hockey to play advantage? When there is an offense away from the play, not committed DIRECTLY by the attacking team, play continues. Don't tell me he had to blow that dead. Put your arm up and let the play develop. It was poorly done.

Either way hell of a game. Had my heart in my throat for much of last evening.

I think you're #1 point cancels out your #2 point. Whenever there's coincidental penalties or 'an incident' the refs have to blow it dead. Even if player A is beating up Player B and in the end only player A gets a penalty, they can't just let play continue while one guy punches another. Or just a regular fight, two players drop their gloves and getting into the boxing stance. Even if one team has a breakaway it has to be blown dead.

I think the whole thing just happened so fast. 90% of the time, Hjalmarsson fires that high and wide and nothing comes of it.

[BSF21]

I saw two problems. Granted a little bit of homerism but...

1) Saad appeared to do very little to instigate that, then got shoved into the bench, then got thrown to the ice, then threw a punch as the Wing's player was on top of him. If you want to call that offsetting, well you're wrong, but even if you do, there has to be some acknowledgement that the guy who was 90% the receiver and 10% the offender should not receive the same penalty. I don't know if you want to make it an x2 minor or a 5 min call on the other guy but that simply cannot be 2 minutes apiece.

2) Why is there no rule in hockey to play advantage? When there is an offense away from the play, not committed DIRECTLY by the attacking team, play continues. Don't tell me he had to blow that dead. Put your arm up and let the play develop. It was poorly done.

Either way hell of a game. Had my heart in my throat for much of last evening.

I think you're #1 point cancels out your #2 point. Whenever there's coincidental penalties or 'an incident' the refs have to blow it dead. Even if player A is beating up Player B and in the end only player A gets a penalty, they can't just let play continue while one guy punches another. Or just a regular fight, two players drop their gloves and getting into the boxing stance. Even if one team has a breakaway it has to be blown dead.

I think the whole thing just happened so fast. 90% of the time, Hjalmarsson fires that high and wide and nothing comes of it.

So in that case how do you police it? If there is a bad play in the neutral zone and a fast breakout, grab the nearest opponent, thrown them down and start throwing punches? So they have to stop it? I'm just noting with the way it happened I don't understand how that is coincidental minors. Saad got fucking mugged.

[Steve of phpBB]

I saw two problems. Granted a little bit of homerism but...

1) Saad appeared to do very little to instigate that, then got shoved into the bench, then got thrown to the ice, then threw a punch as the Wing's player was on top of him. If you want to call that offsetting, well you're wrong, but even if you do, there has to be some acknowledgement that the guy who was 90% the receiver and 10% the offender should not receive the same penalty. I don't know if you want to make it an x2 minor or a 5 min call on the other guy but that simply cannot be 2 minutes apiece.

2) Why is there no rule in hockey to play advantage? When there is an offense away from the play, not committed DIRECTLY by the attacking team, play continues. Don't tell me he had to blow that dead. Put your arm up and let the play develop. It was poorly done.

Either way hell of a game. Had my heart in my throat for much of last evening.

I think you're #1 point cancels out your #2 point. Whenever there's coincidental penalties or 'an incident' the refs have to blow it dead. Even if player A is beating up Player B and in the end only player A gets a penalty, they can't just let play continue while one guy punches another. Or just a regular fight, two players drop their gloves and getting into the boxing stance. Even if one team has a breakaway it has to be blown dead.

I think the whole thing just happened so fast. 90% of the time, Hjalmarsson fires that high and wide and nothing comes of it.

So in that case how do you police it? If there is a bad play in the neutral zone and a fast breakout, grab the nearest opponent, thrown them down and start throwing punches? So they have to stop it? I'm just noting with the way it happened I don't understand how that is coincidental minors. Saad got fucking mugged.

At the very least, Saad should get a few courtesy points in the NHL Playoff Pool game, right?

[degenerasian]

I saw two problems. Granted a little bit of homerism but...

1) Saad appeared to do very little to instigate that, then got shoved into the bench, then got thrown to the ice, then threw a punch as the Wing's player was on top of him. If you want to call that offsetting, well you're wrong, but even if you do, there has to be some acknowledgement that the guy who was 90% the receiver and 10% the offender should not receive the same penalty. I don't know if you want to make it an x2 minor or a 5 min call on the other guy but that simply cannot be 2 minutes apiece.

2) Why is there no rule in hockey to play advantage? When there is an offense away from the play, not committed DIRECTLY by the attacking team, play continues. Don't tell me he had to blow that dead. Put your arm up and let the play develop. It was poorly done.

Either way hell of a game. Had my heart in my throat for much of last evening.

I think you're #1 point cancels out your #2 point. Whenever there's coincidental penalties or 'an incident' the refs have to blow it dead. Even if player A is beating up Player B and in the end only player A gets a penalty, they can't just let play continue while one guy punches another. Or just a regular fight, two players drop their gloves and getting into the boxing stance. Even if one team has a breakaway it has to be blown dead.

I think the whole thing just happened so fast. 90% of the time, Hjalmarsson fires that high and wide and nothing comes of it.

So in that case how do you police it? If there is a bad play in the neutral zone and a fast breakout, grab the nearest opponent, thrown them down and start throwing punches? So they have to stop it? I'm just noting with the way it happened I don't understand how that is coincidental minors. Saad got fucking mugged.

You can't stop it other than the player doing the mugging would get 17 minutes in penalties. Is a 7 minute power play worth stopping a breakaway for? I see your point where you don't see Saad doing anything, that's the refs interpretation of the rule. Again it's because I think refs don't want to give powerplays that late so it's easy to send them both off.

[Scottie]

The refs decide the games by trying not to decide the games.

In other words, they let the players decide the games.

[sancarlos]

The refs decide the games by trying not to decide the games.

In other words, they let the players decide the games.

I'm all for not calling ticky-tack penalties, so the players can decide the games. But, at times, this philosophy leads to players getting away with egregious infractions, that ought to be called.

[brian]

The refs decide the games by trying not to decide the games.

In other words, they let the players decide the games.

I'm all for not calling ticky-tack penalties, so the players can decide the games. But, at times, this philosophy leads to players getting away with egregious infractions, that ought to be called.

If we're speaking in the theoretical here (as it sounds like we are), that usually cuts both ways. I agree it can be frustrating at times, but officials are damned if they do and damned if they don't.

[BSF21]

I'll add that the officiating has been damned good in most of the games I have watched. Just a really tough call there.

[Shrew]

What's gotten into the Bruins? I've not really followed hockey seriously since Hasek inspired legions of young hockey fans into traction and scoliosis.

The Boston media was grilling them for their lackluster performance at the end of the season. Now outscoring the Penkittens 7-1 on their home ice?

I'm surprised Pittsburgh subbed goalies, doesn't seem like a smart move.

[Scottie]

26-18-4 and a first-round win over a division champion didn't get him fired. Vancouver media, even yesterday, have been going on about getting Torts to coach the Canucks.

Funny, I was in NYC a few days ago and the local media was batting around Vigneault's name as a possible new Ranger's coach.

So basically the Canucks and Rangers traded coaches.

Torts to the Canucks today? That's the news. Oh, my. What a magnificent clusterfuck that's going to be. Global BC News (television) is already taking digs at him.