Canucks @ Predators ~~ March 07, 2010 2:00PM
View Single Post
03-08-2010, 12:19 AM
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Spring Hill, TN
SLake, sorry, gonna disagree. While the Samuelsson goal was a bad goal to give up, Hamhuis gave him enough room to get the shot off. Secondly, back breaking to me is when a team fights back from a large deficit to take the lead and then the goalie gives the lead back to the other team. How can a game tying goal be a back breaker? He gave up a lead but didn't give the other team a lead. It sucked he gave up another one of those goals but to say it was back breaking is overdoing it a bit, IMO.
As far as him not controlling a rebound on the breakaway, you've got to be seriously kidding me. He makes the initial stop on a breakaway. What more do you want him to do? It would be great if he was able to control the rebound a little bit better but his job is to stop the initial shot and hope someone gets back to clear any pucks that are left or get a body on the shooter. No one was back to help him. No one. Yes, two guys collided at the blue line and Franson lacked the speed to get back but when the goalie makes a stop on a breakaway, I don't think you can ask much more than that. Yeah, he left the puck but sometimes you have to make the initial save and worry about where it goes later on. If that rebound that he left was on a wrist shot from a guy on the point, then I'd worry a little more.
It was 2-2 after the Samuelsson goal. It wasn't the end of the world. It wasn't the end of the game. There was more than enough time to even it up and the team didn't get it done. Am I disappointed that Pekka is letting in these sorts of goals, you bet I am. I don't think it's the end of the world though either.
View Public Profile
Find More Posts by glenngineer