Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
On 5/9/2019 at 9:17 PM, 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.

  Why aren't the gates to each bench both in the neutral zone.

  That was a ridiculous reason to negate a goal.

Posted
1 hour ago, CommonCents said:

Delicious. 

Bruins fan? Not sure who here roots for who... 

Posted

Walk outside from a 2-0 game for 5 minutes, walk back in and its 2-2... what a wonderful world.

Posted

NIce first period. 2 goals only 4 shots allowed. Need another period like that and were good!

Posted
49 minutes ago, Dante said:

NIce first period. 2 goals only 4 shots allowed. Need another period like that and were good!

Only team left I can tolerate. Best of luck.

Posted

Wow!

 

The Blues have every right to be furious, that looked like a hand pass.

 

I'm thrilled the Sharks came back and won, but the controversial ending feels uneasy.

  • Like (+1) 1
Posted
2 minutes ago, Mark Vader said:

Wow!

 

The Blues have every right to be furious, that looked like a hand pass.

 

I'm thrilled the Sharks came back and won, but the controversial ending feels uneasy.

That was a blatant hand pass. The Sharks must have pics of Bettman and a goat.

Posted
Just now, ChevyVanMiller said:

That was a blatant hand pass. The Sharks must have pics of Bettman and a goat.

Which is why I hate that this non-call takes away from the Sharks persevering and forcing this game into overtime.

 

That is the play that everyone will remember.

  • Like (+1) 1
Posted

Sharks getting some good luck, but I think they are better equipped to beat the Bruins so...

 

It looked like it wasn't an intentional hand pass. He batted it down and tried to make a play on it himself but he didn't. I like these Sharks but I hate that they have been winning with so much controversy. 

  • Like (+1) 1
Posted
47 minutes ago, Big C said:

Sharks getting some good luck, but I think they are better equipped to beat the Bruins so...

 

It looked like it wasn't an intentional hand pass. He batted it down and tried to make a play on it himself but he didn't. I like these Sharks but I hate that they have been winning with so much controversy. 

Intentional has nothing to do with it. 

Posted
1 hour ago, BigMcD said:

Intentional has nothing to do with it. 

 

I am aware. I can see how the refs may have missed it because in real time it could have looked like he batted the puck down and swatted it with his stick. 

Posted (edited)

How is that play not reviewable?  It's just embarassing for the NHL to have a replay system in place that makes a hand pass that leads to a goal unreviewable.  It's a shame too because it was a great game and comeback in the last minute by the Sharks.

Edited by Doc Brown
Posted

Just saw a replay. That is the most blatant thing I have seen. (Yes I realize intent doesn't matter, but at full speed it was obvious). Wow. That needs to be reviewable, no doubt. Really though, I don't care if it's the third OT of game 7 of the finals, that needs to be called. It's just like Offside for a linesman.  Hand passes are not a usual put your whistle in your pocket non call.

Posted
1 hour ago, May Day 10 said:

Please, no more reviewable plays

i would do away with replay in all sports..hate it. 

 

unfortunately, this will not lead to way more in the NHL..including all 5-minute majors.

 

Wonder if  they will always include a replay for a major not called?

 

@Dante, man do your  boys gut a rabbit foot stuffed up their arse this playoff year

  • Awesome! (+1) 1
×
×
  • Create New...