Jump to content

Random Hockey Observations


Recommended Posts

I didn't have sound for the game (at a bar), so I don't know if they explained why they put Schneider in, but there was some sort of contract loophole or something that goes into effect if he gets 2 more games. Expect him to see like 30 seconds somewhere else before the end of the season.
He needs to play in 25 games to qualify for the Jennings trophy. He had played in 23 games and has one more start scheduled so they needed to slip him in one more game to get his name on the hardware.William M. Jennings TrophyThe William M. Jennings Trophy is an annual award given to the goalkeeper(s) having played a minimum of 25 games for the team with the fewest goals scored against it. Winners are selected based on regular-season play.http://www.nhl.com/ice/page.htm?id=24936
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 22.7k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • serge

    3931

  • Zach6668

    2871

  • digitalmonkey

    2649

  • MapleLeafpoker

    2008

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Taking Jin to his first NHL game Sunday. Seats close to the glass and I get to see McDavid. Probably the last game I see at The Joe.

I want Subban to win all the Norrises now.

vezina NOMINATION for Dev. **** yeahhhhhhhhhhhh. Going to vegas in June

Posted Images

Major props to the refs in the Vancouver/Oilers game last night.I've watched a fair number of Canucks games this year, and much like the Wings, they get a lot of favourable calls, and a lot of hooking, slashing and other stickwork goes uncalled.Last night was different.Firstly, they correctly called a 5 minute major on Raffi Torres for what was, imo, a very dirty hit to the head on Jordan Eberle. Torres should get 3 games, he is lucky Eberle doesn't have a serious concussion, or it would be a lot more.Then, while the Canucks were killing the 5 minute major, there were 2 vicious cross checks in front of the net that happened almost simultaneously. The refs called both penalties, resulting in an extended 5-on-3 for the Oilers. A lot of the time, one or both of those cross checks would have gone uncalled, and it was nice to see the refs get one right.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Based on the way Eberle was leaning, there was basically no way to not hit him in the head, right? Is he supposed to avoid the check altogether?
I think if there's no way not to hit him in the head, you're supposed to avoid the check. Same as if a guy has his numbers facing you, you're not supposed to hit him.
Link to post
Share on other sites
Based on the way Eberle was leaning, there was basically no way to not hit him in the head, right? Is he supposed to avoid the check altogether?
YES! That's the whole idea. STOP HITTING PEOPLE IN THE HEAD WHEN THEY ARE DEFENSELESS!
Link to post
Share on other sites

Is that defenseless?(These are serious questions, by the way, I obviously don't watch a lot of hockey.)It seemed to me like he was going for the puck and had to lean way over to try to gain possession of it, which put his head down and out in front. Isn't it the opposing player's job to not let him get that puck? You seem to want him to pull up before hitting him.I thought part of the definition of defenseless was that it wasn't part of the play. Like in football, a defenseless receiver is after the pass has gone by, not while he's trying to catch it.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Is that defenseless?(These are serious questions, by the way, I obviously don't watch a lot of hockey.)It seemed to me like he was going for the puck and had to lean way over to try to gain possession of it, which put his head down and out in front. Isn't it the opposing player's job to not let him get that puck? You seem to want him to pull up before hitting him.I thought part of the definition of defenseless was that it wasn't part of the play. Like in football, a defenseless receiver is after the pass has gone by, not while he's trying to catch it.
You are not allowed to hit a player without the puck.
Link to post
Share on other sites
Is that defenseless?(These are serious questions, by the way, I obviously don't watch a lot of hockey.)It seemed to me like he was going for the puck and had to lean way over to try to gain possession of it, which put his head down and out in front. Isn't it the opposing player's job to not let him get that puck? You seem to want him to pull up before hitting him.I thought part of the definition of defenseless was that it wasn't part of the play. Like in football, a defenseless receiver is after the pass has gone by, not while he's trying to catch it.
It's the defending player's responsibility to go after the puck, not try to decapitate the guy carrying it. Torres ignored the puck and demolished the puck carrier who was in a vulnerable, defenseless position. IMO it's the same or worse than putting a guy into the boards headfirst with no way to defend himself against it.
Link to post
Share on other sites
Based on the way Eberle was leaning, there was basically no way to not hit him in the head, right? Is he supposed to avoid the check altogether?
YES! That's the whole idea. STOP HITTING PEOPLE IN THE HEAD WHEN THEY ARE DEFENSELESS!
Yup, pretty much.Eberle didn't actually ever touch the puck, he was reaching for it. Torres could have angled him off with his body while grabbing the puck for himself, instead he completely disregarded the puck and leveled Eberle, who was defenseless.
Link to post
Share on other sites
Torres could have angled him off with his body while grabbing the puck for himself, instead he completely disregarded the puck and leveled Eberle, who was defenseless.
I think this is a good argument.I'm not so sure about the argument about whether he touched the puck or not. I mean, it was right there when he got hit.But you guys have convinced me that it was pretty much unnecessary and shouldn't be part of the game.
Link to post
Share on other sites
It's pretty obvious Eberle didn't touch the puck. But does it still count as an interference considering he was reaching for it?
I don't think there's any such penalty as "interference" anymore, unless it's goaltender interference. Torres was given 5 for elbowing and the gate on a misconduct, I think those were probably the right calls to make.
Link to post
Share on other sites
It's pretty obvious Eberle didn't touch the puck. But does it still count as an interference considering he was reaching for it?
By the book, yes. By the precedent set in recent years in the NHL, no. You see guys hitting each other all the time about 10 feet before they reach the puck, when it's loose, and they're kinda neck in neck both heading for it. It bugs me a bit (mostly because that's the reason the Pens lost Malkin for the season), but I think in the long run, it probably helps save more injuries than it causes, since it slows down guys forechecking on what would be prone defensemen. Since you're not allowed to hold a guy up once he chips the puck into the zone, I'm ok with allowing this a little bit to protect the d-men.
Link to post
Share on other sites
I don't think there's any such penalty as "interference" anymore, unless it's goaltender interference. Torres was given 5 for elbowing and the gate on a misconduct, I think those were probably the right calls to make.
Of course there is. Chara got 5+game for interference on Pacioretty. They call regular interference all the time, but they've started allowing two guys who are going after a loose puck a bit of leeway in terms of initiating contact before either one of them get to the puck.
Link to post
Share on other sites
Of course there is. Chara got 5+game for interference on Pacioretty. They call regular interference all the time, but they've started allowing two guys who are going after a loose puck a bit of leeway in terms of initiating contact before either one of them get to the puck.
Ah, shit, you're absolutely right. I was thinking of Obstruction...that's the penalty that was phased out when they tried to curb the clutch and grab NHL and make it more of a finesse league coming out of the lockout.
Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah right, that only lasted a few years, it feels like. It was still stupid. They just added a tag to remind themselves to actually enforce the rules that were already on the books, lol.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I don't think there's any such penalty as "interference" anymore, unless it's goaltender interference. Torres was given 5 for elbowing and the gate on a misconduct, I think those were probably the right calls to make.
I see interference get called almost every game against the Wings. Yes, the Wings do get called for penalties.
Link to post
Share on other sites
I see interference get called almost every game against the Wings. Yes, the Wings do get called for penalties.
I agree they take the odd call, but shocked that it includes interference penalties! :club:
Link to post
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

Announcements


×
×
  • Create New...