|
Tonight was just the perfect storm of rules and officiating issues more or less. I think NHL officials for the most part do a fantastic job, and stuff like the offsides goal is a scenario that would be missed by most linesmen. I also think they got it wrong with the waved icing in overtime, but to a very slim extent I can see why it happened. Puck slowed down before the goal line, and so did the player. It's a lovely, tough call. Officials had a rough night tonight.
|
#
?
May 4, 2017 07:21
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 10, 2024 11:31 |
|
|
switching gears, from the beagle comment earlier: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n0Z4jOGaq3Q  even better that it was so off-the-cuff
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2017 07:23
|
|
|
My favourite part of CBC reviewing the goal during the intermission is them being surprised that a screened goal would be allowed. Oilers played really well tonight in the first period and last part of the third, but they didn't sink as many goals as they should have and let the Ducks (read: Getzlaf) crawl back. There was little wrong with the officiating and Oilers fans are getting precious about calls made against their favour. See also the crowd chanting "refs you suck" after Lucic got a penalty for cross-checking that one dude. Jehde fucked around with this message at 07:38 on May 4, 2017 |
|
#
?
May 4, 2017 07:34
|
|
|
shyduck posted:Tonight was just the perfect storm of rules and officiating issues more or less. I think NHL officials for the most part do a fantastic job, and stuff like the offsides goal is a scenario that would be missed by most linesmen. I also think they got it wrong with the waved icing in overtime, but to a very slim extent I can see why it happened. Puck slowed down before the goal line, and so did the player. It's a lovely, tough call. Officials had a rough night tonight. If they weren't consistently garbage, most posters would be surprised instead of frustrated. The refs blew 2 calls that resulted in 2 goals, completely erasing the fantastic first period efforts of a team. The requirement of the coach to step in and point out what they did wrong resulted in the first blown call handcuffing him when they blew the second. 3 things could have fixed this. 1. A referee with 300 HD camera angles being able to provide input on questionable goals without having to be asked and without risk to the harmed team and without a significant delay of the game. 2. clear rules and consistent reffing. 3. A referee checking every "near-miss" offside automatically while play continues, and being able to stop play if it is offside so we don't lose 5 minutes of game and a goal because it was offside the whole time and essentially meaningless. A blind ref who missed it when it happened right in front of them while it was the only thing they should have been looking at isn't going to suddenly see it on an ipad. A blind ref being given absolute power over whether to announce to a crowd full of people who already hate him that he made a mistake probably isn't going to admit it. Give the coach a coaches challenge with the knowledge that somebody has probably already reviewed the situation and didn't feel it warranted voluntary intervention. JawKnee posted:To be honest, for as rigorous as freezing step-by-step can be for me on a youtube video, it looks like perry is entirely outside the crease on that entire play (from the overhead view) - talbots mask, stick, and food are at best on the line Okay. assume he is. Does that mean any small portion of the goalie outside of the crease is open game to contact even if he is largely inside the crease. Picture game 7, stanley cup finals, Canucks vs Bruins, and Marchand keeps skating full speed nearly clipping the line around the crease at every opportunity waiting for the goalie to mistakenly poke a toe over the line.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2017 07:35
|
|
|
I think that you have no loving idea how hard it is to officiate an NHL speed hockey game.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2017 07:48
|
|
|
Kalenn Istarion posted:I think that you have no loving idea how hard it is to officiate an NHL speed hockey game. Then maybe we should provide them with modern tools with the goal of achieving consistency, fairness, and game flow.  Or let them stare at an ipad for 10 minutes and stick to their guns to defend their pride. e: also, try john deere green, it's delicious.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2017 07:53
|
|
|
Powershift posted:Okay. assume he is. Does that mean any small portion of the goalie outside of the crease is open game to contact even if he is largely inside the crease. Picture game 7, stanley cup finals, Canucks vs Bruins, and Marchand keeps skating full speed nearly clipping the line around the crease at every opportunity waiting for the goalie to mistakenly poke a toe over the line. No, of course not - and the rules are clear on this - intentional contact anywhere is not allowed. This contact doesn't look intentional though. As I said earlier: Perry is a poo poo - but he can't see through the back of his head where Talbot is - which tends to take intent out of it. I think he definitely intended to screen Talbot - even at a very close distance. I doubt he intended to interfere with him (mostly because it's against the rules, rather than Perry actually giving a poo poo about being nice)
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2017 07:58
|
|
|
I didn't even watch the ANA/EDM game tonight, but that Perry goal definitely shouldn't have counted. Wasn't a penalty or anything, just should've been waived off.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2017 08:14
|
|
|
JawKnee posted:No, of course not - and the rules are clear on this - intentional contact anywhere is not allowed. This contact doesn't look intentional though. As I said earlier: Perry is a poo poo - but he can't see through the back of his head where Talbot is - which tends to take intent out of it. I think he definitely intended to screen Talbot - even at a very close distance. I doubt he intended to interfere with him (mostly because it's against the rules, rather than Perry actually giving a poo poo about being nice) If the difference between intentional contact and incidental contact is whether or not the player is looking at where his feet are, every Marchand sloughfoot was incidental contact. if any part of the goalie sticking out of the crease when the majority of the goalie is inside the crease opens him up to incidental contact that interferes with his movement, we will see a lot more of it from dirty players who accidentally step on the goalies skate battling in front or skate by quickly and "oops" bumped your pads that were hanging out of the crease. If that's the case, i think we need to move to the IIHF crease, or goalies will have to hug the post when the puck is at the center of the faceoff circle. If the officiating continues to be wishywashy and seemingly aimed at extending games and series, we will see more confusion and anger. If we keep seeing the game stopped so a ref can stare at an ipad, and offsides up on the jumbotron within seconds of a goal with no recourse beyond forcing the ref to stare at an ipad for 5 minutes, we'll see fans watching something else. Perry didn't intend to skate into talbot, but he made no effort to avoid him until contact was made. contact was made, it resulted in a goal. Talbot would have had a hard time determining whether or not his skate was completely within the lines of the crease without looking down, also affecting his ability to do his job. My frustration doesn't entirely stem from this single moment in this single game, but from the poor, inconsistent, and unpredictable officiating through the entire season which has sunk to new lows in these playoffs. I may be more emotional about this specific case because it caused my team to lose an important game 4. Just to demonstrate my point. This is wider ice but you still get the idea.  Where the goalie is in this picture would be largely inside the NHL crease, with a foot outside the crease. If incidental contact that prevented them from making a save happened with the goalie in this position, it should be interference. With an NHL crease, the goalie would have to be a foot to the right to be inside the crease, and therefor deeper in the net. Where the goalie is standing in this picture is not a position protected from incidental contact that causes a goal in the NHL based on today's referee's interpretation of the rules. I don't want to see goalie's needing to keep their rear end hanging over the goal line to be protected from dirty players. e: if the oilers lose this series, foot out of the crease will become the new foot in the crease, and Brett Hull can finally be released from his curse. Powershift fucked around with this message at 08:37 on May 4, 2017 |
|
#
?
May 4, 2017 08:25
|
|
|
Powershift posted:Perry didn't intend to skate into talbot, but he made no effort to avoid him until contact was made. contact was made, it resulted in a goal. Talbot would have had a hard time determining whether or not his skate was completely within the lines of the crease without looking down, also affecting his ability to do his job. My frustration doesn't entirely stem from this single moment in this single game, but from the poor, inconsistent, and unpredictable officiating through the entire season which has sunk to new lows in these playoffs. I may be more emotional about this specific case because it caused my team to lose an important game 4. Perry is trying to get around the Edmonton defender and due to contact gets pushed closer to the crease. As he's trying to stop, he unintentionally bumps into Talbot's blocker and right skate. Is it goalie interference? I'd probably say yes. The thing is I've seen way worse poo poo also be ruled non-interference (notably Max Domi hitting Steve Mason's head and shifting his mask it as the puck was being shot) so if you're going by precedent, you probably just go with the original call. The only real solution is to have concrete criteria of what is and isn't goalie interference, which has been pointed out doesn't exist.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2017 08:59
|
|
|
I understand those realities, and discussing it to death won't fix anything, but it does ease the frustration. Also, I'm sorry, Kalenn, I'm sure you're a wonderful, fully functional individual.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2017 09:26
|
|
|
Carey Price would have gotten that call. 
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2017 09:27
|
|
|
Duke Chin posted:Carey Price would have gotten that call. Cujo would have tackled the ref.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2017 09:32
|
|
|
Powershift posted:I understand those realities, and discussing it to death won't fix anything, but it does ease the frustration. As much as any goon is I prefer the blue of the old Ford tractors over John Deere green tho
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2017 10:05
|
|
|
"We're just happy to be in the second round" gets pretty twisted as our much maligned boy "Hope" enters the equation. Reffing can sometimes be bad and sometimes your team benefits from it and other times it very much does not. I am sorry your team lost a playoff game but that don't mean we gotta get on the horn and hold an emergency GM meeting to replace all the refs with teleconferencing robots who ref exclusively with lasers and rigid enforcement of the rules book.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2017 11:35
|
|
HOTLANTA
|
That is some incidental contact holy poo poo. The question is does the contact prevent the goalie from making a save. Talbot is letting that in every day. because he is a pumpkin
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2017 11:55
|
|
|
Ducks goal seems fine to me because I don't think we should call that level of contact interference in the NHL. Oshie slash is whatever, that's gonna happen. I'm pretty at peace with missed calls in hockey and prefer that to stopping the game ever so often for 5 minutes to figure poo poo out. But obviously Tom Wilson should cripple Bonino at the next opportunity.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2017 12:18
|
|
|
glynnenstein posted:Oshie slash is whatever, that's gonna happen. I'm pretty at peace with missed calls in hockey and prefer that to stopping the game ever so often for 5 minutes to figure poo poo out. It was a "high stick" Speaking of that, why did Wilson get Karlsson-level ice time last night? I was also wondering if anyone had that chart handy of Capital fans hopes over the course of a 7 game series with the Pens.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2017 12:27
|
|
|
glynnenstein posted:Ducks goal seems fine to me because I don't think we should call that level of contact interference in the NHL. I've seen worse (more ticky-tack and ridiculously called or more obvious and blatantly not called) called this year, and I'd argue consistently getting the wrong decision is more important that inconsistently getting the right one. You can reliably fix one of those, you can't really do a thing about the other. Duke Chin posted:Carey Price would have gotten that call. He wouldn't have. He actually doesn't get as many calls and goalie interference decisions as you'd kinda expect he would. I don't really think any team gets too many calls in their favour. Except the Bruins. Every call they get is a call they don't deserve .
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2017 12:32
|
|
|
Schlesische posted:I've seen worse (more ticky-tack and ridiculously called or more obvious and blatantly not called) called this year, and I'd argue consistently getting the wrong decision is more important that inconsistently getting the right one. You can reliably fix one of those, you can't really do a thing about the other. Oh, I completely agree. Where the line is drawn is really a pretty subjective decision, but being consistent on calling to that line is the part that's really important for fairness. That said, I don't think it's important enough to stop the game to get it "right."
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2017 13:15
|
|
|
Powershift posted:Then maybe we should provide them with modern tools with the goal of achieving consistency, fairness, and game flow. Subjective officiating is a part of the game, just like umpire strike zone variations in baseball are. Players learn individual officials' foibles and learn how to take advantage of them.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2017 13:25
|
|
|
are edmonton or pittsburgh fans worse this year? hard to say
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2017 13:26
|
|
|
See the thing is that you can go over these specifics about the crease rules and incidental contact and everything, but ultimately what the issue is is that every one of us has seen exactly that called off numerous times. More often than not.Citizen Tayne posted:Subjective officiating is a part of the game, just like umpire strike zone variations in baseball are. Players learn individual officials' foibles and learn how to take advantage of them. Yeah it's like how under some referees, Bonino's face strike zone goes down to his elbows. Aphrodite fucked around with this message at 13:42 on May 4, 2017 |
|
#
?
May 4, 2017 13:40
|
|
|
Jamwad Hilder posted:are edmonton or pittsburgh fans worse this year? hard to say Rule 69 (nice) in the posting handbook is too vague on this IMO.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2017 13:49
|
|
|
Aphrodite posted:See the thing is that you can go over these specifics about the crease rules and incidental contact and everything, but ultimately what the issue is is that every one of us has seen exactly that called off numerous times. More often than not. Yeah, it owns. Thanks Bonino, you're a great hockey player!
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2017 14:08
|
|
|
The real problem with that call is it helped the Ducks and damaged the Oilers. Bettman should have called in and demanded that be fixed.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2017 14:11
|
|
|
The Caps are bad and should feel bad.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2017 14:32
|
|
|
TWO BAD CALLS
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2017 14:37
|
|
|
Furnaceface posted:I mean yeah diving and not getting caught is a thing but the league will fine you if you do it too often or if its blatant enough, even after the fact, despite getting away with it during the game. It happened to Blandisi. Twice. In a single season. I once saw Blandisi take four diving penalties in one game. He really earned the reputation.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2017 14:48
|
|
|
Levitate posted:Yeah I just looked at the shots for tonights game and yeahh hard to say the Caps didn't dominate the game by that measure but they have no finish. Weird. I find it remarkable that both Penguins series have involved games where the Pens get dominated in the first, weather the storm because neither Columbus nor Washington could finish, and then go to work in the last 40 minutes scoring goals while MAF bails them out. Some of the bounces which have worked for the Pens/against CBJ or WSH, too...holy hell. Jamwad Hilder posted:are edmonton or pittsburgh fans worse this year? hard to say https://twitter.com/BurghRambler909/status/859512949186146304 This is two weeks after that series ended. I mean, this isn't hard.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2017 15:04
|
|
|
But he's responding to a Columbus fan...
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2017 15:06
|
|
|
CBJSprague24 posted:This is two weeks after that series ended. I mean yeah but they're not writing 2500+ words complaining about why a goal shouldn't have counted
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2017 15:07
|
|
|
Powershift posted:Cujo would have tackled the ref. Mike Smith would have lost his helmet and stick and been writhing in the net.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2017 15:12
|
|
|
Aphrodite posted:But he's responding to a Columbus fan... It's too late, Random Twitter Guy has already been entered into the Book of Grudges.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2017 15:20
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/markhmasters/status/860142456381337600 !!!!!
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2017 15:46
|
|
|
The blood ritual is almost complete.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2017 15:50
|
|
|
Crosby is going to die playing in a series that the Penguins don't need him to play in.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2017 15:51
|
|
|
I think Mark mistyped there. He meant to say "spinning" not "skating". Also him being ready for game 5 seems a little too optimistic so I'm not gonna get my hopes up for that.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2017 15:52
|
|
|
Sit Crosby for game 5, no need to rush him back. The Caps are perfectly capable of beating themselves without the Pens best player.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2017 15:57
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 10, 2024 11:31 |
|
|
Crosby sidelined due to mild concussion - 01-06-10
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2017 16:07
|
|