HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Western Conference > Central Division > Nashville Predators
Notices

11/17/08: Nashville vs. San Jose

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
11-17-2008, 09:55 PM
  #26
Enoch
This is my boomstick
 
Enoch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Chattanooga TN
Country: United States
Posts: 12,341
vCash: 500
Well, that was disappointing, but it was not really surprising. Lets hope Arnott is okay. It looked very scary in real time.

__________________
- Enoch -
Enoch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-17-2008, 09:59 PM
  #27
zecke26
Registered User
 
zecke26's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 10,211
vCash: 500
the guy with dumont on the back wasn't dumont. he looked totally unable to score.

i don't like koistinen as setup man for weber on the PP. i think there has to be a guy who can read the play quicker.

but in general i have to admit that i like your team a lot. whenever i watch the preds, they outscore the opponent. the 3rd period was ok.
and so far the only option for the norris is a predator.

zecke26 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-17-2008, 10:01 PM
  #28
Lee Van Cleef*
 
Lee Van Cleef*'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Perth, Australia
Country: Australia
Posts: 8,798
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by zecke26 View Post
the guy with dumont on the back wasn't dumont. he looked totally unable to score.

i don't like koistinen as setup man for weber on the PP. i think there has to be a guy who can read the play quicker.

but in general i have to admit that i like your team a lot. whenever i watch the preds, they outscore the opponent. the 3rd period was ok.
and so far the only option for the norris is a predator.
Nah, Boyles gonna get it.

Lee Van Cleef* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-17-2008, 10:04 PM
  #29
zecke26
Registered User
 
zecke26's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 10,211
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lee Van Cleef View Post
Nah, Boyles gonna get it.
weber is clearly the most amazing D at the moment. he handles everything so good. he's the total package. but his problem is called "predators". the team is too weak. the norris usually goes to a defender of a contending team.

zecke26 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-18-2008, 12:48 AM
  #30
Seth Lake
Registered User
 
Seth Lake's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Nashville, TN
Country: United States
Posts: 8,853
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Seth Lake
[preface] I'm posting this here on the Predators board, not on the general board, or the Sharks board. It is my opinion from watching it live in person and also once on replay. If I see more angles on replay, I may change my opinion, but thus far I have seen it this way and based on conversations with fans and others positioned around the arena, I have a lot of people that agree with me. You might disagree with me, that is fine. I have no problem with that, but understand where I'm coming from and please respond with more than one line hit-and-run posts. Otherwise, simply agree to disagree and that'll be that, it is over...can't change it now.[/preface]

IMO, on the Arnott-Pavelski collision that ended the first period and sent Jason to the hospital on a stretcher, #8 Joe Pavelski should have received a five-minute major and a game misconduct for interference.

Pavelski was in no way deliberately intending to injure Arnott, nor did he act in an overtly malicous way, but he is ultimately responsible for his action and the results of his action.

Arnott was chasing a rebound off of Boucher and attacking the net from a 45 degree angle. Pavelski took a path to intersect Arnott at the point of the puck. That is fine and dandy, however Pavelski made contact with Arnott prior to arriving at the puck, knocking Arnott off balance, and continued through with his contact (momentum) driving Arnott towards the net, but the part that makes this interference IMO was that he finished his contact with a deliberate, full-arm extentsion, push to Arnott's back that propelled him forcefully into the goal frame. The push was very visible live in person and still stood out very distinctly on the one replay shown inside the arena - even as almost all of us were watching with full focus on where Arnott's head landed and not how it got there.

The league made it a point of emphasis this summer by adding a major penalty and game misconduct option to the rulebook to empower referees to make the appropriate call in instances where players are being driven from behind into the goal frame. This was admittedly not the textbook example of a player driving his opponent square from behind into the net, but nonetheless is by rule within the definition.

Pavelski finished his contact with Arnott (borderline interference at this point) with a direct push to Arnott's back that propelled him forcefully into the net. As a result of this action, Arnott was injured and was taken off the ice on a stretcher. The presence of an injury automatically should have ramped up the penalty on Pavelski to a major penalty and game misconduct for Interference under Rules 56.4 and 56.5 of the NHL rulebook.

Instead, the senior official (Dan O'Halloran) immediately signals from the blueline (as the back official) that the faceoff would come outside the zone because he ruled Arnott to have knocked the net off of his own violition. That was what was getting booed and was absolutely insane! Even if you do not agree with my assessment of the situation, you must agree that there was contact with Pavelski that knocked Arnott into the goal frame and that the faceoff should have taken place inside the zone.

Note that I'm not calling for a suspension, but strongly believe that Pavelski should have been ejected from the game and that the Preds should have received a five-minute major power play.

Bottom line tonight was that I think that the officiating was brutal and very unprofessional, however that was not the reason we lost. San Jose outplayed us in almost every facet of the game and that's why they won - plain and simple...the refs were absolutely brutal, but were not the deciding factor tonight.

Seth Lake is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-18-2008, 12:53 AM
  #31
Seth Lake
Registered User
 
Seth Lake's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Nashville, TN
Country: United States
Posts: 8,853
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Seth Lake
BTW, on another note...

Trotz always gets put down for "taking numbers", so on a night when he is honored for achieving several milestones in his coaching career, lets acknowledge that in the third period coming out of the TV timeout after the Nichol-Thornton fight, Barry recognized that McLellan had put his fourth line out on the ice and actually pulled back Fiddler (who was on his way to the other end of the ice) and physically told Tootoo to go out there and take care of business.

Props to Trotzy for getting the right personnel on the ice for that situation!

Seth Lake is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-18-2008, 01:30 AM
  #32
Dave is a killer
Roll Wide Roll
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Country: Italy
Posts: 22,773
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SLake View Post
[preface] I'm posting this here on the Predators board, not on the general board, or the Sharks board. It is my opinion from watching it live in person and also once on replay. If I see more angles on replay, I may change my opinion, but thus far I have seen it this way and based on conversations with fans and others positioned around the arena, I have a lot of people that agree with me. You might disagree with me, that is fine. I have no problem with that, but understand where I'm coming from and please respond with more than one line hit-and-run posts. Otherwise, simply agree to disagree and that'll be that, it is over...can't change it now.[/preface]

IMO, on the Arnott-Pavelski collision that ended the first period and sent Jason to the hospital on a stretcher, #8 Joe Pavelski should have received a five-minute major and a game misconduct for interference.

Pavelski was in no way deliberately intending to injure Arnott, nor did he act in an overtly malicous way, but he is ultimately responsible for his action and the results of his action.

Arnott was chasing a rebound off of Boucher and attacking the net from a 45 degree angle. Pavelski took a path to intersect Arnott at the point of the puck. That is fine and dandy, however Pavelski made contact with Arnott prior to arriving at the puck, knocking Arnott off balance, and continued through with his contact (momentum) driving Arnott towards the net, but the part that makes this interference IMO was that he finished his contact with a deliberate, full-arm extentsion, push to Arnott's back that propelled him forcefully into the goal frame. The push was very visible live in person and still stood out very distinctly on the one replay shown inside the arena - even as almost all of us were watching with full focus on where Arnott's head landed and not how it got there.

The league made it a point of emphasis this summer by adding a major penalty and game misconduct option to the rulebook to empower referees to make the appropriate call in instances where players are being driven from behind into the goal frame. This was admittedly not the textbook example of a player driving his opponent square from behind into the net, but nonetheless is by rule within the definition.

Pavelski finished his contact with Arnott (borderline interference at this point) with a direct push to Arnott's back that propelled him forcefully into the net. As a result of this action, Arnott was injured and was taken off the ice on a stretcher. The presence of an injury automatically should have ramped up the penalty on Pavelski to a major penalty and game misconduct for Interference under Rules 56.4 and 56.5 of the NHL rulebook.

Instead, the senior official (Dan O'Halloran) immediately signals from the blueline (as the back official) that the faceoff would come outside the zone because he ruled Arnott to have knocked the net off of his own violition. That was what was getting booed and was absolutely insane! Even if you do not agree with my assessment of the situation, you must agree that there was contact with Pavelski that knocked Arnott into the goal frame and that the faceoff should have taken place inside the zone.

Note that I'm not calling for a suspension, but strongly believe that Pavelski should have been ejected from the game and that the Preds should have received a five-minute major power play.

Bottom line tonight was that I think that the officiating was brutal and very unprofessional, however that was not the reason we lost. San Jose outplayed us in almost every facet of the game and that's why they won - plain and simple...the refs were absolutely brutal, but were not the deciding factor tonight.
Unbelievable recap my good man, you hardly ever disappoint, thanks for recapping that bit of action of Arnott & Pavelski as I wasn't able to catch the game at all tonight

Dave is a killer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-18-2008, 01:30 AM
  #33
Pinkfloyd
Registered User
 
Pinkfloyd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Roseville
Country: United States
Posts: 29,261
vCash: 500
No referee in the NHL is going to call a major on that. Mostly because there was no interference. Joe Pavelski is entitled to the ice that he was on because he didn't impede Jason Arnott.

The puck was arriving there and that is a hockey play that no referee is going to call even though the outcome sucked.

Pinkfloyd is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
11-18-2008, 01:38 AM
  #34
Seth Lake
Registered User
 
Seth Lake's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Nashville, TN
Country: United States
Posts: 8,853
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Seth Lake
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pinkfloyd View Post
No referee in the NHL is going to call a major on that. Mostly because there was no interference. Joe Pavelski is entitled to the ice that he was on because he didn't impede Jason Arnott.

The puck was arriving there and that is a hockey play that no referee is going to call even though the outcome sucked.
I respect your opinion, but have now watched several replays and feel even stronger that it should have been five and a game for interference. Pavelski never made a play on the puck and hit Arnott before he could get there, knocking him off balance. The hand still stands out driving Arnott over Boucher and into the net.

Pavelski is entitled to his ice, but so is Arnott and Pavelski took a line that intersected Arnott's prior to Arnott being able to touch the puck. That is interference.

Seth Lake is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-18-2008, 01:44 AM
  #35
sparkle twin
Curse strikes again!
 
sparkle twin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Hendersonville, TN
Country: United States
Posts: 2,859
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to sparkle twin Send a message via AIM to sparkle twin
I still don't understand why someone with the size and talent as Joe Thornton needs to act like such a baby every damn time he gets touched.

How many times does Ryan Jones have to get a stick or elbow in the face or be blatantly boarded for someone to call a penalty. It seems like every game he's getting hit in the face or being run from behind.

And I'm so sick of guys needing to fight just because someone on their team got hit, with a clean, legal hit no less. It's hockey, players are going to get hit but now, almost every game, players are trying to start fights because a teammate got hit. It's one thing if it's from behind or up high, but a plain check, let it go and just play the ****ing game!



Better play than in SJ, but crappy goals against.

Leggy with a great goal!!! Finally someone stayed at the net for the rebound and didn't have a fly-by!

At least Arnott is OK, most important thing.

sparkle twin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-18-2008, 03:07 AM
  #36
Paranoid Android
ERMAHGERD
 
Paranoid Android's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: CO
Posts: 11,274
vCash: 500
Unfortunately, Refs don't have the benefit of watching instant replays over and over. It happened so quick I can understand why there was no call. I haven't seen a replay yet, but I didn't see an obvious penalty when the play happened.

Paranoid Android is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-18-2008, 07:58 AM
  #37
Enoch
This is my boomstick
 
Enoch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Chattanooga TN
Country: United States
Posts: 12,341
vCash: 500
Good synopsis Slake, and you present your case well. I think at the least, you have to say that Pavelski made a poor decision in shoving a guy that is skating in that hard in the back. Its a move I came to expect from Bernier on that team in years past (pre-trade)......stupid/physical/dangerous.

Enoch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-18-2008, 08:25 AM
  #38
zecke26
Registered User
 
zecke26's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 10,211
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by spank303 View Post
I still don't understand why someone with the size and talent as Joe Thornton needs to act like such a baby every damn time he gets touched.
for the same reason he has to fight a guy 7 inches smaller. and thornton was the one who wanted that fight.

zecke26 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-18-2008, 12:49 PM
  #39
worstfaceoffmanever
What's the Pred say?
 
worstfaceoffmanever's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Winston-Salem, NC
Country: United States
Posts: 12,360
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by spank303 View Post
And I'm so sick of guys needing to fight just because someone on their team got hit, with a clean, legal hit no less. It's hockey, players are going to get hit but now, almost every game, players are trying to start fights because a teammate got hit. It's one thing if it's from behind or up high, but a plain check, let it go and just play the ****ing game!
It's called sticking up for your teammates, it happens all across the NHL... except here, apparently.

The funny part is, this team thinks they've got some grit to them, when in reality we're a small, soft team that gets pushed around and consistently controlled by an aggressive forecheck. This has happened at some point or another in every game I've seen us play this season. The Los Angeles game was an anomaly in this respect - it's not the style of game we as a team like to play, but I think it's the style that we as a team NEED to play to be successful. Crashing the net, sacrificing the body, finishing checks, and not taking crap off of any other team in the Western Conference is the kind of game we need to be playing with our current talent (or lack thereof).

worstfaceoffmanever is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-18-2008, 01:00 PM
  #40
darth5
Rowsdower!
 
darth5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Smashville, TN
Country: United States
Posts: 2,371
vCash: 500
I did not watch the whole game but I saw the Arnott incident on Tivo. I looped it back and forth several times. I agree completely with Slake's synopsis of the incident completely.

The Sharks commentators really can go over the top sometimes. They even brought up the old 'trap' fallacy again. I expect a certain amount of 'from our team' perspective of what is happening-- it is intended for the audience of that team, after all. But there is an obligation in my mind to acknowledge the other team and its players are on the ice and may have something to do with what is happening there. Realistically two teams are playing and sometimes events are chance, sometimes one of the two teams is in control. It is not always the 'home' team not executing a play, sometimes it is an effective check at the right time, or a pass that is anticipated, etc. Announcers should acknowledge that. I mean, Pete and Terry are sometimes having an unrelated conversation in the midst of a hockey game, but I feel they respect and recognize all the good plays or bad ones from players on both teams.

On referee's discretion calls in general (not incidents where they do not have the right sightline) you have to wonder-- if the standings positions were reversed, would a penalty be called? Does the fact that SJ is the #1 team right now play at all in to those judgement calls? I used to think that it was an advantage as to which team was controlling the pace and tempo of the game, or the 'superstar' status of an individual player involved, that sometimes influenced these situations but lately as I watched more hockey I have begun to feel it is bigger even than that.

darth5 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-18-2008, 01:16 PM
  #41
Seth Lake
Registered User
 
Seth Lake's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Nashville, TN
Country: United States
Posts: 8,853
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Seth Lake
Quote:
Originally Posted by Predanerd View Post
Unfortunately, Refs don't have the benefit of watching instant replays over and over. It happened so quick I can understand why there was no call. I haven't seen a replay yet, but I didn't see an obvious penalty when the play happened.
I agree that this is the most difficult sport in the world to officiate and the fact that they are not allowed to use instant replay to make penalty calls is perfectly fine with me. As a matter of fact, I would be vehemently opposed to expanding replay from it's current role because it would cause unnecessary delays and take out the human element of the game.

From where I sit, I was essentially looking at the play from the exact opposite angle of both referees. That may have been a major factor in the officials not seeing the push from behind, but that does not excuse the fact that there are four sets of eyes on the ice that could have made that call.

The fact that O'Halloran being the trail official with a very poor angle on the play, immediately rules "no foul" and further rules that the faceoff should come outside because Arnott was not forced into the net is what is so appalling. L'Ecuyer (an AHL official on substitute duty) was the official in the zone and immediately blew the whistle to stop play when the goal was dislodged, but it wasn't until after O'Halloran (the senior NHL official) ruled the play to come outside that L'Ecuyer made any type of motion besides putting his hands up to stop play.

Seeing it live I immediately thought we should have been going on a 5 on 3 advantage with Pavelski serving two minutes for interference, but as soon as you saw that Arnott was injured, the penalty automatically should have been upped to a five-minute major and game misconduct for interference. Replays had no effect on the outcome of my opinion and I stand by my initial call.

Seth Lake is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-18-2008, 03:00 PM
  #42
DManPreds11
Registered User
 
DManPreds11's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Murfreesboro, TN
Country: United States
Posts: 260
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by spank303 View Post
I still don't understand why someone with the size and talent as Joe Thornton needs to act like such a baby every damn time he gets touched.

How many times does Ryan Jones have to get a stick or elbow in the face or be blatantly boarded for someone to call a penalty. It seems like every game he's getting hit in the face or being run from behind.

And I'm so sick of guys needing to fight just because someone on their team got hit, with a clean, legal hit no less. It's hockey, players are going to get hit but now, almost every game, players are trying to start fights because a teammate got hit. It's one thing if it's from behind or up high, but a plain check, let it go and just play the ****ing game!



Better play than in SJ, but crappy goals against.

Leggy with a great goal!!! Finally someone stayed at the net for the rebound and didn't have a fly-by!

At least Arnott is OK, most important thing.
Couldn't have said it better myself, I can't stand Thorton and the little Pavelski they dive more than any forwards in the league. Plus can't stand watchin the game from the Sharks announcers especially when Toots was called for "Charging" replay showed that when the contact was made Toots skate was on the ice. Only after the hit the boards did he come off his skates. Then the announcers called it "taking a run at somebody". Then after Toots beat the "S" out of Staubitz they called it an "even bout" lol. We know that if Thorton would have been hit into the net like that it would've been a major penalty. Can't touch them Sharks!!! You see "Big Joe" pulling away from Toots after his gloves came off then he goes after Nichol I bet "Big Joe" felt like a man after that bout. Then Shelley going after DeVires now that was an "even bout"(sarcasism). DeVires couldn't fight himself out of a wet paper bag. I know one thing I was missing Hordi last night.

DManPreds11 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-18-2008, 03:07 PM
  #43
nodq
 
nodq's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Teal Town, CA
Country: United States
Posts: 721
vCash: 500
Hey pred fans, I come in peace.

A few things:

Officiating. It's impossible to catch everything, every time. I don't think Pavs should have got a penalty at all, as Arnott was trying to play the puck, which makes him fair game. If anything, at most an interference with 2:00. By no means should that have been a major. Majors are for intent to injure (i.e. boarding) where there is a obvious chance of the player getting hurt. Nobody knew that Arnott would have gone head first into the pipe/net. It's a freak accident at best. Continued on that, the refs were not skewed in SJ's favor. One clear shot from the Pred's D bounced off the net and out of play but the faceoff stayed in the sharks zone. The replay clearly showed that. but it happens. refs miss things.

Announcers:
I've heard most teams throughout the league (via Center Ice) and I find the Sharks team to be among the LEAST biased (although they still are, as are all teams announcers). The comments about them never mentioning the other team is ridiculous. They are always commenting on good plays by the other team. Drew does it like 20 times every game. I've heard the Pred announcers and they seem pretty good (obvious biased towards the preds as expected). I do agree with the random conversation comment during play though. If you want to hear HOMER BIASED announcing, catch the Avalanche announcing squad. You wouldn't even know they were playing another team. Everything is because the Avs wanted to do something. They even showed a replay where the Sharks steal the puck away at the blue line and said it was a great Avs play.

On a side note too, SJ's announcers were obviously liked enough that they got the job for NHL 2K game.

Rough play/fighting:
It's hockey. San Jose in the past has a rep of not defending it's players. They are making it a point to change that this season. Look at past games (i.e. playoffs) between Sj and the preds. Always physical. These teams hate each other. Preds took runs at Cheechoo a few seasons ago and no one stood up. That ain't happening anymore. If you guys don't want to see Thornton beating up guys half his size, put a leash on Tootoo. i think the rest of your team is pretty talented, but Tootoo only hurts your team. Cheapshots only get other guys on your team beat up. Guys like him and Avery give hockey a bad name.

nodq is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-18-2008, 03:45 PM
  #44
DManPreds11
Registered User
 
DManPreds11's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Murfreesboro, TN
Country: United States
Posts: 260
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by nodq View Post
Hey pred fans, I come in peace.

A few things:

Officiating. It's impossible to catch everything, every time. I don't think Pavs should have got a penalty at all, as Arnott was trying to play the puck, which makes him fair game. If anything, at most an interference with 2:00. By no means should that have been a major. Majors are for intent to injure (i.e. boarding) where there is a obvious chance of the player getting hurt. Nobody knew that Arnott would have gone head first into the pipe/net. It's a freak accident at best. Continued on that, the refs were not skewed in SJ's favor. One clear shot from the Pred's D bounced off the net and out of play but the faceoff stayed in the sharks zone. The replay clearly showed that. but it happens. refs miss things.

Announcers:
I've heard most teams throughout the league (via Center Ice) and I find the Sharks team to be among the LEAST biased (although they still are, as are all teams announcers). The comments about them never mentioning the other team is ridiculous. They are always commenting on good plays by the other team. Drew does it like 20 times every game. I've heard the Pred announcers and they seem pretty good (obvious biased towards the preds as expected). I do agree with the random conversation comment during play though. If you want to hear HOMER BIASED announcing, catch the Avalanche announcing squad. You wouldn't even know they were playing another team. Everything is because the Avs wanted to do something. They even showed a replay where the Sharks steal the puck away at the blue line and said it was a great Avs play.

On a side note too, SJ's announcers were obviously liked enough that they got the job for NHL 2K game.

Rough play/fighting:
It's hockey. San Jose in the past has a rep of not defending it's players. They are making it a point to change that this season. Look at past games (i.e. playoffs) between Sj and the preds. Always physical. These teams hate each other. Preds took runs at Cheechoo a few seasons ago and no one stood up. That ain't happening anymore. If you guys don't want to see Thornton beating up guys half his size, put a leash on Tootoo. i think the rest of your team is pretty talented, but Tootoo only hurts your team. Cheapshots only get other guys on your team beat up. Guys like him and Avery give hockey a bad name.
Obviously you've never watched a game done by Crispy and Weber. I know I watch A LOT of NHL games and I don't get caught up in bias opinions in fact I hate them. I call'em the way I see'em. Terry and Pete call the games better than anybody, I know every game Crispy will see a penalty called against the opposing team and I'm like "dang the're calling what on that play" and not far behind my thought Crispy is saying "wow, come on that's a ticky tack call". I also watch a lot of Sharks games against other teams, teams I can't stand like the Sharks. Now this is my own opinion but the Sharks get more PP's that are on a "ticky tack" call than any other team. I know some are earned because your team does play puck possession hockey that can cause them to get "some" calls like hooking or holding(I'll refer to my previous post on the 2 Sharks I dislike on diving). I think the rest of your team plays legit hockey, I was REALLY wanting the rumors of last season to be true(Marleau to Nashville). As far as the Pavelski hit I didn't think a penalty should be called but I'd bet my paycheck if that was Thorton something would've been called. I know some penalties called on other teams against us I'm like "dang, but we'll take it". The thing about the Shark fans I've encounter is that EVERY penalty they get they deserve. Like the holding on Zanon in the first against Thorton (B.S.),the Charging called on Toots against Pavelski(B.S.) and the Interference on Suter against Staubitz(B.S.) other than that, all the other calls I could see the ref making. I know you guys gotta way with a couple of penalties, a couple the crowd didn't like I thought our player was embellishing so I was glad "unsportsman like" penalty wasn't called against us. Other than that I hate your team but I call it they way I see it, not only in our game but every hockey game I watch. Bottom like though we're all passionate hockey fans and that we share the same thought that we don't get enough respect in sports or in coverage around the states but that's a whole different subject.


Last edited by DManPreds11: 11-18-2008 at 03:55 PM.
DManPreds11 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-18-2008, 04:00 PM
  #45
DManPreds11
Registered User
 
DManPreds11's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Murfreesboro, TN
Country: United States
Posts: 260
vCash: 500
Oh by the way where was the "cheap shots" that Toots took on your team? I thought Thorton slashing and cross-checking Nichol was pretty cheap. I have the game taped so I can slow it down and show you on you tube. Hitting is part of hockey or is it anymore. I guess the hit on Marleau from Hamhuis was a "cheapshot" eh?? Or because it was Hammer and not Toots do you see it as a clean hit?? Not tryin to argue I was wanting to get your view point on that. PEACE

DManPreds11 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-18-2008, 04:06 PM
  #46
vipera1960
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 173
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by nodq View Post
Hey pred fans, I come in peace.

A few things:

Officiating. It's impossible to catch everything, every time. I don't think Pavs should have got a penalty at all, as Arnott was trying to play the puck, which makes him fair game. If anything, at most an interference with 2:00. By no means should that have been a major. Majors are for intent to injure (i.e. boarding) where there is a obvious chance of the player getting hurt. Nobody knew that Arnott would have gone head first into the pipe/net. It's a freak accident at best. Continued on that, the refs were not skewed in SJ's favor. One clear shot from the Pred's D bounced off the net and out of play but the faceoff stayed in the sharks zone. The replay clearly showed that. but it happens. refs miss things.
Personally, I feel that at most it should have been a minor for interference, which, by rule, would have been a double-minor because an injury occurred (which is why a high-stick that draws blood is a double-minor). However, it was a quick play and I can see the officials not making any call. Overall, I thought the officiating was terrible. Not terrible in a biased way, just that there were a lot of missed/inconsistent calls. By the way, on the puck that hit the frame of the goal, that puck should have remained in the zone because the rules were changed this season causing pucks that deflect out of play off the frame of the goal to remain in the offensive zone.

vipera1960 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-18-2008, 04:14 PM
  #47
snaggle toof
Registered User
 
snaggle toof's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 951
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by vipera1960 View Post
By the way, on the puck that hit the frame of the goal, that puck should have remained in the zone because the rules were changed this season causing pucks that deflect out of play off the frame of the goal to remain in the offensive zone.

Do you have a link to somthing that confirms this because I have not heard of anything like this.

On the Pavelski Arnott incident, I don't see how it could even be called interfernce, the puck had been centered prior contact, if you watch the replay on TSN the puck has just passed through the crease when contact is made(and contact is shoulder to shoulder, possibly some hip on hip contact but not a hit or push from behind).

http://watch.tsn.ca/nhl/#clip/113570

Scroll down to find the game highlights


Last edited by snaggle toof: 11-18-2008 at 04:20 PM. Reason: added link
snaggle toof is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-18-2008, 04:16 PM
  #48
vipera1960
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 173
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by byter View Post
Do you have a link to somthing that confirms this because I have not heard of anything like this.

On the Pavelski Arnott incident, I don't see how it could even be called interfernce, the puck had been centered prior contact, if you watch the replay on TSN the puck has just passed through the crease when contact is made(and contact is shoulder to shoulder, possibly some hip on hip contact but not a hit or push from behind).
The NHL website hasn't updated to the 2008-09 rulebook, but here is an article from TSN that outlines the change.
http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/story/?id=241045
Quote:
The last change will be to Rule 85.5 on faceoff location, saying that if a puck is shot off the goal frame, goal post or crossbar, the subsequent faceoff will remain in the end zone where the puck went out of play.

vipera1960 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-18-2008, 04:21 PM
  #49
snaggle toof
Registered User
 
snaggle toof's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 951
vCash: 500
Cool, thanks for the link.

snaggle toof is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-18-2008, 04:30 PM
  #50
DManPreds11
Registered User
 
DManPreds11's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Murfreesboro, TN
Country: United States
Posts: 260
vCash: 500
Brad Lukowich Interference in the second on Radek Bonk, I was wondering why the face-off was outside our offensive zone when the foul occurred inside our defensive zone. Anybody figure that one out??

DManPreds11 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 03:39 PM.

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.