HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Metropolitan Division > New York Rangers
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

Official Game 5 OT + Post game thread

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
05-04-2008, 11:21 PM
  #176
trueblue9441
Registered User
 
trueblue9441's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Bronx, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 3,499
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to trueblue9441
Quote:
Originally Posted by marty30brodeur View Post
um no? any evidence man.
um no? look at the picture.. watch your dvr.. watch it again. its offsides..

trueblue9441 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-04-2008, 11:29 PM
  #177
WhipNash27
Quattro!!
 
WhipNash27's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Westchester, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 15,564
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by marty30brodeur View Post
because its a human error that in the rule book is not reviewable. What dont you get about it. Its not reviewable nor should it be because a lot of offsides are close calls. This argument is soo dumb. I dont think anyone besides a ranger fan can actually be arguing this.
So is missing a high stick that went into the net. So is missing a kick in or the puck getting batted into the net. Anytime a play is reviewed with the exception of whether the referee lost sight of the puck it is technically due to human error. A high stick is usually due to it being border line, I'll give you that. How about a kick in? 9 times out of 10 that's due to human error of a referee just not seeing it or not seeing it clearly. So why is that allowed to be reviewed?

If the play was offside, and the team who was scored against never assumed control of the puck I still haven't heard a rational explanation as to why a goal scored on such a play should not be reviewed.

If this was soccer this play would be talked about for a week and their offsides is a lot easier to blow the call than in hockey. In hockey we have a line drawn on the ice and the luxury of video review. If this call went against the Devils you all would be saying the same thing.

WhipNash27 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-05-2008, 12:31 AM
  #178
otterulz
 
otterulz's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Flushing
Country: South Korea
Posts: 302
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trxjw View Post
Do you really need to be trolling our boards?
Eh, just leave him alone. He's a sad little Devils fan that just wants to bask in the failures of our club while trying to ignore the failures of his.

Who was it that eliminated the Devils from the playoffs this year? Who was it again? I can't remember. And in how many games?

Loser.

otterulz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-05-2008, 12:02 PM
  #179
GLM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 507
vCash: 500
fun series. be proud of that rangers team. that series wasnt reflective of the 4 games to 1. few bounces of the puck and this series would have probably gone to 7.

lundqvist is a beast. that guy is going to be awesome for a long time.

GLM is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-05-2008, 12:30 PM
  #180
GilliesGirlie
Registered User
 
GilliesGirlie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: former Long Islander
Country: United Kingdom
Posts: 6,105
vCash: 500
I can understand the frustration of some of you with the goal and wether or not the play was offside.

But, I don't know if making a play like that reviewable is the best thing, it will open a huge can of worms, it is a tough call.

It sucks though that it was the goal that ended the series...

A tough pill to swallow for sure....

__________________
R.I.P. Uncle John.... I love you!
R.I.P. Sal Forever Young 4//4/92-9/23/13
GilliesGirlie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-05-2008, 01:11 PM
  #181
Reverend_Hellh0und
Registered User
 
Reverend_Hellh0und's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 1,158
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by PruBlue25 View Post
it is

Here's the best view I could get of the play at the end of the game. As you can see the puck is just about to cross over the line. If you look you see that Dupis was just a hair across the line with both of his feet pretty much together and a white space between him and the blueline. Now, the linesman is all the way across the other side. The blue lines show that his line of sight is probably blocked by Malkin. He probably could not see the puck nor could he probably see whether Dupis was onside. However, as we can see it was offside.

Now the question that I pose is, why isn't this type of play reviewable? It was offsides, so why isn't there some kind of review?


That is definitive proof? Look like the puck is on goal side of the line which would be onsides no?








Quote:
Originally Posted by Whoot Whoot View Post
Last goal OT appears offsides



This picture the puck is in the zone already you can not determine off sides or not.



Reviewing every questionable off sides would make games last 6 hours......

Reverend_Hellh0und is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:44 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2014 All Rights Reserved.