Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
1 minute ago, May Day 10 said:

 

It has always been based on flagrancy/amount of 'carelessness'.  2 minutes for HS, double minor for blood, 5 minute major if severe violation.

 

I always loved how hockey has a penalty tangibly based on if there is bleeding or not.

 

Have to disagree - it was an automatic major if you drew blood.  That’s why some guys were so good at biting thru their lip (Ray Bourque comes to mind). 

 

Obviously, you can score more goals in major than a double-minor, and some guys bleed more easily, maybe making the current rule more fair.

.

Posted
25 minutes ago, May Day 10 said:

Since I recall (1987 through now, but more vividly perhaps 1990 on), the blood was to detect a double-minor

Correct.  Blood has never been a qualification for a major penalty to the best of my knowledge.

Posted
7 hours ago, Jukester said:

 

 

Correct, horrible rule.  If the guy can't get called for too many men on the ice then he is inactive as a player.  Why should he qualify for Offside.  Hate inconsisten schite like this in sports when common sense can't be used when making rules. And forget the fact that his skate looked like it was still on the blue line when the puck was in the zone. At worst, inconclusive.  

But the call was consistent. What your asking for is the ref to make a black and white call subjective. In effect, the exact opposite of consistency. My biggest problem with NHL officiating is the subjective nature of refereeing in the playoffs. What was illegal in the regular season is now ok in the playoffs. Refs now in the position to control the game by NOT calling all kinds of shite. Hell, I was screaming at the TV all series because the constant pick plays the Av's were running. Why no penalties? By trying to not have an impact on the game the refs are having the most impact by letting teams cheat. Really done with all the whining of calls made when all the other crap going on effects the game even more but not even mentioned. 

Posted
6 hours ago, May Day 10 said:

 

I always loved how hockey has a penalty tangibly based on if there is bleeding or not.

 

It is so weird...............And, I don't remember it in the 70s.  Although maybe I just missed it.  

Posted (edited)
3 hours ago, Dante said:

But the call was consistent. What your asking for is the ref to make a black and white call subjective. In effect, the exact opposite of consistency. My biggest problem with NHL officiating is the subjective nature of refereeing in the playoffs. What was illegal in the regular season is now ok in the playoffs. Refs now in the position to control the game by NOT calling all kinds of shite. Hell, I was screaming at the TV all series because the constant pick plays the Av's were running. Why no penalties? By trying to not have an impact on the game the refs are having the most impact by letting teams cheat. Really done with all the whining of calls made when all the other crap going on effects the game even more but not even mentioned. 

No, i'm saying if the player is inactive for one rule, be consistent and make him inactive for all rules.

 

But i do agree with you on the double standard between reg season and playoffs.  Case in point, tonight's Boston game.  Been a beef of mine since i started watching hockey as a kid.

Edited by Jukester
Posted
11 hours ago, Jukester said:

No, i'm saying if the player is inactive for one rule, be consistent and make him inactive for all rules.

 

But i do agree with you on the double standard between reg season and playoffs.  Case in point, tonight's Boston game.  Been a beef of mine since i started watching hockey as a kid.

I feel it puts the refs in a really bad position. In addition to making the correct calls, now they have to make decisions when to call them. The prevailing mentality for years has been "We (the refs) don't want to affect the game" "Let 'em play" 

Well, they are influencing the outcome by letting teams interfere, hold and obstruct or whatever it is. There is a faceoff in my end and the Avs win the draw. Puck goes back to the point and a Shark forward goes out to cover. Landescog cuts him off in the faceoff circle preventing him from defending. Avs Dman scored from the point. More subtle and less obvious than either the Shark offside call or the 5 min major vs Vegas but just as impactful as a goal was allowed when there should have been a call. This has always bothered me.

Posted

I still can’t believe that BOTH teams buffalo acquired 1st round picks from are playing against each other in the conference finals (giving them 2 of the last 4 picks in the 1st round). 

 

Thankfully we traded one one of the picks to Anaheim for Montour while it still had that value of the unknown. 

 

Unreal though. If that’s not buffalo luck, I don’t know what is.  lol

  • Haha (+1) 1
Posted

That steal and score by Mirier SP was sweet, one of the best goals I've seen so far in the playoffs.

Posted
On 5/10/2019 at 12:58 PM, Dante said:

Couldn't fight it. Bought a couple of tix for game one. GO SHARKS!

 

 

You are celebrating now!

 

Two goals by Buffalo Bills fan Logan Couture! Sharks were on tonight, great win.

Posted

Solid game by the Sharks last night. Hopefully Blues can take something from that third period and carry it forward to game 2.

×
×
  • Create New...