HFBoards

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

Prongers disallowed goal

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
12-01-2010, 01:49 PM
  #51
Jester
Registered User
 
Jester's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: St. Andrews
Country: Scotland
Posts: 34,075
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Flyerfan808 View Post
I thought they scored shortly into OT. IIRC Carter got a double minor for a high stick (with blood) then moments later they flagged OD for one of the weakest boarding calls I have seen in a while.

I agree with Jester, if they're going to interpret the Sean Avery penalty that way, then I expect it to be called against all teams.
It was Pronger with the high stick (behind the net). Which we killed off... but Green then scored on the PP that extended into OT. Just an awful call.

Jester is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-01-2010, 01:55 PM
  #52
HoverCarle*
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,859
vCash: 500
Send a message via MSN to HoverCarle*
Oh my bad, for some reason I thought it was shootout

HoverCarle* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-01-2010, 02:07 PM
  #53
JXC
#LaviPondHockeyFail
 
JXC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Country: United States
Posts: 13,889
vCash: 500
You could tell from Pronger's reaction that he knew what he was doing and that he knew it was borderline.

JXC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-01-2010, 02:58 PM
  #54
Cartsiephan*
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 2,488
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Flyerfan808 View Post

I agree with Jester, if they're going to interpret the Sean Avery penalty that way, then I expect it to be called against all teams.
But the point is that it will not. I think this is only the 2nd time since it was initiated that it has been called. And the intent of the rule was not for what Pronger did but for what Avery was doing for :21 seconds. What Pronger did was like a fwd tying up a d-mans stick so his linemate can swat the puck into the net, it is part of the flow of the game and never gets called.

Cartsiephan* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-01-2010, 03:15 PM
  #55
CS
Bryzgalov's Blueline
 
CS's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Lumberton, NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 13,998
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cartsiephan View Post
But the point is that it will not. I think this is only the 2nd time since it was initiated that it has been called. And the intent of the rule was not for what Pronger did but for what Avery was doing for :21 seconds. What Pronger did was like a fwd tying up a d-mans stick so his linemate can swat the puck into the net, it is part of the flow of the game and never gets called.
For once I agree with you.

This is going to be another point of emphasis on the main board VERY soon, I guarantee it. There's going to be more people calling out "hand screening" just because guys are putting their sticks and arms up to deflect shots toward the net or motioning to the boards to direct traffic, regardless of whether or not Pronger was doing that or not.

The NHL opened up a Pandora's Box, and it's not going to stop here. How much screening is allowed? At what point does it crosses that line?

Knowing the NHL's fickle strategy and discretionary officiating tactics, this is only going to be a significant complaint by NHL fans moving forward.

I would pity the NHL for having to deal with another problem, but yet again, it's a problem they brought upon themselves.

Officials can't even get some calls right when it's defined for them. Now you're adding the element of discretion to it? Nothing good can come of this.


Last edited by CS: 12-01-2010 at 03:36 PM.
CS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-01-2010, 03:21 PM
  #56
Cartsiephan*
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 2,488
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris Shafer View Post
For once I agree with you.

This is going to be another point of emphasis on the made board VERY soon, I guarantee it. There's going to be more people calling out "hand screening" just because guys are putting their sticks and arms up to deflect shots toward the net or motioning to the boards to direct traffic, regardless of whether or not Pronger was doing that or not.

The NHL opened up a Pandora's Box, and it's not going to stop here. How much screening is allowed? At what point does it crosses that line?

Knowing the NHL's fickle strategy and discretionary officiating tactics, this is only going to be a significant complaint by NHL fans moving forward.

I would pity the NHL for having to deal with another problem, but yet again, it's a problem they brought upon themselves.

Officials can't even get some calls right when it's defined for them. Now you're adding the element of discretion to it? Nothing good can come of this.
Players put their sticks up in the vision of the keeper all the time, if Pronger had his hand on the stick and blocked his vision would that be illegal??? As you said, where does it end, and at the same time the refs are now going to have to know the intent of the offender as well. With Avery it was clear cut, and thus the reason for the addendum.

Now if Pronger takes his glove, holds it out and the goalie moves to a lower position and his glove follows him, and the goalie moves again and the glove mimicks his movement it would be a cause for making the call. This was one moment, one action which is no different than his moving his entire body in that direction.

Cartsiephan* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-01-2010, 04:36 PM
  #57
Dead
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: AoW Land
Country: Wake Island
Posts: 405
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JagerPuck View Post
Case and point:

This play really shows how much the NHL Officiating body is out to glorify players rather than protect the sanctity of the game, and for that matter, their safety.
What is Callahan had gotten a concussion from his head getting slammed on the ice?
If the NHL wanted to make an example of dirty hits to the head and slewfooting it should be Crosby sucker punching Boris Valabik a few years ago, for which he was not disciplined at all.
And hes still at it, as we can see.
What a ****ing load of ****.
As much as I want to see the rangers loss every game, that call of interference is BS! What was he doing interfering with Crosby's slewfoot? The call was blatantly siding with the pengs craybaby.

Dead is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-01-2010, 04:51 PM
  #58
Dead
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: AoW Land
Country: Wake Island
Posts: 405
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Flyerfan808 View Post
I was watching these and thought I'd share:



While this call was not to due to a totally blatant avery, if you look carefully when pronger is waving his stick/arm he is NOT looking towards the play but looking directly at the keeper. That tends to indicate that he was not focused on the play and merely screening the keeper, but was intent on interfering with the keepers view. If he was not looking toward the goalie when making those arm/stick movements I would say the call was 100% wrong.

Dead is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-01-2010, 05:05 PM
  #59
CS
Bryzgalov's Blueline
 
CS's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Lumberton, NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 13,998
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dead View Post
While this call was not to due to a totally blatant avery, if you look carefully when pronger is waving his stick/arm he is NOT looking towards the play but looking directly at the keeper. That tends to indicate that he was not focused on the play and merely screening the keeper, but was intent on interfering with the keepers view. If he was not looking toward the goalie when making those arm/stick movements I would say the call was 100% wrong.
Pronger looked back at the keeper on the opposite side where the goal was being scored AFTER he had already done his hand waiving thing. Even then he only looked back at Kipper when he felt Kipper contact him with the slash. Based on that video, he never looked at Kipper before or after his hand was up until Kipper slashed him.

Even then, people screening the goalie almost take glances back at the keeper from time to time to get their positioning in order to screen a shot with their bodies.

Your argument is 100% wrong.

CS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-02-2010, 07:58 AM
  #60
Jester
Registered User
 
Jester's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: St. Andrews
Country: Scotland
Posts: 34,075
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris Shafer View Post
Pronger looked back at the keeper on the opposite side where the goal was being scored AFTER he had already done his hand waiving thing. Even then he only looked back at Kipper when he felt Kipper contact him with the slash. Based on that video, he never looked at Kipper before or after his hand was up until Kipper slashed him.

Even then, people screening the goalie almost take glances back at the keeper from time to time to get their positioning in order to screen a shot with their bodies.

Your argument is 100% wrong.
Chris, he clearly looks over his left shoulder and then turns his hand around (open) and puts it directly in Kipper's face.

Jester is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-02-2010, 08:19 AM
  #61
CS
Bryzgalov's Blueline
 
CS's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Lumberton, NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 13,998
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jester View Post
Chris, he clearly looks over his left shoulder and then turns his hand around (open) and puts it directly in Kipper's face.
From 0:14 to 0:16 he doesn't look at the goalie.

Unless I'm going completely blind...

CS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-02-2010, 08:23 AM
  #62
MsWoof
Registered User
 
MsWoof's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 13,036
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jester View Post
Chris, he clearly looks over his left shoulder and then turns his hand around (open) and puts it directly in Kipper's face.
Yup, he definitely looked at him and put his hand right in front of Kipper's face. You could also tell in his post game comments that he knew he was guilty.

MsWoof is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-02-2010, 08:25 AM
  #63
Jester
Registered User
 
Jester's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: St. Andrews
Country: Scotland
Posts: 34,075
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris Shafer View Post
From 0:14 to 0:16 he doesn't look at the goalie.

Unless I'm going completely blind...
You are... at 0:14 he looks over his left shoulder, finds Kipper and then sticks his hand in his face open handed, which is the clearest evidence that he was using his hand to screen Kipper and not direct traffic or whatever else.

Of course, it's easier to see with a bigger image.

Jester is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-02-2010, 08:25 AM
  #64
StandingCow
Registered User
 
StandingCow's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Country: United States
Posts: 3,542
vCash: 50
Guilty of what? He still did nothing that should have disallowed the goal, and again, if it was a penalty, call it right away.

Im so past this anyway...

StandingCow is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-02-2010, 08:27 AM
  #65
Jester
Registered User
 
Jester's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: St. Andrews
Country: Scotland
Posts: 34,075
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Woof View Post
Yup, he definitely looked at him and put his hand right in front of Kipper's face. You could also tell in his post game comments that he knew he was guilty.
Well, I'm sure Pronger thought it was BS... I still think it's goofy that this is the first time we've seen this called without ever having heard this supposed explanation of how the rule was to be applied. The NHL is just so awful at communicating.

Jester is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-02-2010, 08:36 AM
  #66
CS
Bryzgalov's Blueline
 
CS's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Lumberton, NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 13,998
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jester View Post
You are... at 0:14 he looks over his left shoulder, finds Kipper and then sticks his hand in his face open handed, which is the clearest evidence that he was using his hand to screen Kipper and not direct traffic or whatever else.

Of course, it's easier to see with a bigger image.
Hold on, let me see if I can find a better video.

I have pretty good eyesight, and I really cannot see where he looks back at Kipper.

CS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-02-2010, 08:40 AM
  #67
Jester
Registered User
 
Jester's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: St. Andrews
Country: Scotland
Posts: 34,075
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris Shafer View Post
Hold on, let me see if I can find a better video.

I have pretty good eyesight, and I really cannot see where he looks back at Kipper.
Go to the 50 s. mark, they show the close up and you can see him turn his head to get Kipper in his peripheral vision and then he sticks his hand right in his face.

Jester is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-02-2010, 08:53 AM
  #68
CS
Bryzgalov's Blueline
 
CS's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Lumberton, NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 13,998
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jester View Post
Go to the 50 s. mark, they show the close up and you can see him turn his head to get Kipper in his peripheral vision and then he sticks his hand right in his face.
Oh, alright.

At 0:53 he looks at where Kipper is (Pronger is to Kipper's left at the time). Then Pronger moves over, and then puts his arm up WITHOUT looking at Kipper.

I think there's a fine line there whether he was looking behind him at Kipper just to get a read on where he is. He then lifts his arm out with his stick as if he's going to deflect a shot, and then he moves over back toward the front of Kipper after looking back. Players screening the goalie do that all the time.

After moving back towards the front of Kipper, he does not look back at Kipper before or while putting his hand up.

CS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-02-2010, 09:04 AM
  #69
Jester
Registered User
 
Jester's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: St. Andrews
Country: Scotland
Posts: 34,075
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris Shafer View Post
Oh, alright.

At 0:53 he looks at where Kipper is (Pronger is to Kipper's left at the time). Then Pronger moves over, and then puts his arm up WITHOUT looking at Kipper.

I think there's a fine line there whether he was looking behind him at Kipper just to get a read on where he is. He then lifts his arm out with his stick as if he's going to deflect a shot, and then he moves over back toward the front of Kipper after looking back. Players screening the goalie do that all the time.

After moving back towards the front of Kipper, he does not look back at Kipper before or while putting his hand up.
Chris, seriously, turn down the homer. He turns his head, locates him in his peripheral vision, and then sticks his OPEN HAND in front of his face. Do you think he was taking in the advertising in the corner?

Jester is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-02-2010, 09:09 AM
  #70
Valhoun*
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: West Chester, PA
Posts: 10,311
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Valhoun*
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jester View Post
Chris, seriously, turn down the homer. He turns his head, locates him in his peripheral vision, and then sticks his OPEN HAND in front of his face. Do you think he was taking in the advertising in the corner?
I'm sure that Pronger knew what he was doing but people legitimately motion in the exact same way that he did when directing the play all the time. If this was any sort of court where the burden of evidence was on the accuser, there is no way you'd prove that he was in the wrong.

The penalty was called extremely late and I am positive that it doesn't get called at all if Richards' shot doesn't go in. He was facing away from the goalie and any obstruction had no effect on a shot that happened 5 seconds later.

It's complete ********. A rookie ref called the entire game like total **** and hopefully has been told privately that he's a jackass and that his entire family should burn to death.

Valhoun* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-02-2010, 09:22 AM
  #71
Jester
Registered User
 
Jester's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: St. Andrews
Country: Scotland
Posts: 34,075
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Valhoun View Post
I'm sure that Pronger knew what he was doing but people legitimately motion in the exact same way that he did when directing the play all the time. If this was any sort of court where the burden of evidence was on the accuser, there is no way you'd prove that he was in the wrong.
When people motion for directing play (of note: there was no one over there to direct play to) they generally don't turn their hand around so that it has the largest possible profile, or push their hand back behind them -- thus bringing it closer to Kipper standing behind him and taking up more of his vision.

If he was directing traffic his hand would have been parallel to the ground (seriously, motion to your left and see what position your hand is in)... and he almost certainly wouldn't have pushed his arm behind the level of his shoulder.

It's pretty obvious what he was doing.

Quote:
The penalty was called extremely late and I am positive that it doesn't get called at all if Richards' shot doesn't go in. He was facing away from the goalie and any obstruction had no effect on a shot that happened 5 seconds later.

It's complete ********. A rookie ref called the entire game like total **** and hopefully has been told privately that he's a jackass and that his entire family should burn to death.
Well, the word after the fact was that the league had supposedly circulated information that suggested this was exactly how this play should be called. Whether that is a truthful claim is of note, but it supports that the ref made a correct interpretation of how the NHL wanted them to call this situation. Call was certainly made late, but as noted above... that happens all the time, a goal was just involved here. How often do you see the arm go up on a trip when the ref realizes a scoring chance is going to happen off of it, as opposed to in the act itself?

I think this application of the rule is dumb... but if that's the way it is, and the way it is going to be called, then that's the way it is.

Jester is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-02-2010, 09:28 AM
  #72
CS
Bryzgalov's Blueline
 
CS's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Lumberton, NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 13,998
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jester View Post
Chris, seriously, turn down the homer. He turns his head, locates him in his peripheral vision, and then sticks his OPEN HAND in front of his face. Do you think he was taking in the advertising in the corner?
I'm not turning on any homer.

If I saw it, I would say I saw it. I literally cannot see where Pronger turned and glanced at Kipper right before or while putting his arm up. If I can't see it watching through two angles of video over and over again, how is a ref going to see this so called "peripheral vision" glance at game speed?

It's obvious he looks like he's trying to screen the goalie with the hand, but this is a discussion about looking at Kipper. Don't bring irrelevant subject matter into this discussion or try to ascertain your victory by calling me a "homer."

CS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-02-2010, 09:28 AM
  #73
Valhoun*
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: West Chester, PA
Posts: 10,311
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Valhoun*
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jester View Post
When people motion for directing play (of note: there was no one over there to direct play to) they generally don't turn their hand around so that it has the largest possible profile, or push their hand back behind them -- thus bringing it closer to Kipper standing behind him and taking up more of his vision.

If he was directing traffic his hand would have been parallel to the ground (seriously, motion to your left and see what position your hand is in)... and he almost certainly wouldn't have pushed his arm behind the level of his shoulder.

It's pretty obvious what he was doing.
Richards said that he was calling for the puck and that's what they do in practice. Total ********? Maybe. Plausible enough? Sure.

It's just such a minor infraction, if indeed it was on purpose, that it makes the league look silly. You can screen a goalie with every part of your body except your hand. Unless, of course, your hand is holding a stick. But you'd better be facing away from the goalie because it would be unfair if you were able to see what you were supposed to be standing in front of...

It reminds me of the silly kicking motion rule. Just allow goals to be kicked it. It happens so rarely and the league wants to boost goal scoring anyway. It would instantly remove all the ******** that happens with disallowed goals in the playoffs.

Valhoun* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-02-2010, 09:32 AM
  #74
Jester
Registered User
 
Jester's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: St. Andrews
Country: Scotland
Posts: 34,075
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris Shafer View Post
I'm not turning on any homer.

If I saw it, I would say I saw it. I literally cannot see where Pronger turned and glanced at Kipper right before or while putting his arm up. If I can't see it watching through two angles of video over and over again, how is a ref going to see this so called "peripheral vision" glance at game speed?

It's obvious he looks like he's trying to screen the goalie with the hand, but this is a discussion about looking at Kipper. Don't bring irrelevant subject matter into this discussion or try to ascertain your victory by calling me a "homer."
He turns his head, man. His head pivots on his neck due to muscles controlled by his brain, and then he puts his had up.

And I very much doubt the ref saw the head movement, he saw the obvious use of the hand to screen the goalie. The issue is people suggesting Pronger was just directing traffic, when it's pretty obvious he was fully conscious what he was doing.

Jester is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-02-2010, 09:32 AM
  #75
Jester
Registered User
 
Jester's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: St. Andrews
Country: Scotland
Posts: 34,075
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Valhoun View Post
Richards said that he was calling for the puck and that's what they do in practice. Total ********? Maybe. Plausible enough? Sure.

It's just such a minor infraction, if indeed it was on purpose, that it makes the league look silly. You can screen a goalie with every part of your body except your hand. Unless, of course, your hand is holding a stick. But you'd better be facing away from the goalie because it would be unfair if you were able to see what you were supposed to be standing in front of...

It reminds me of the silly kicking motion rule. Just allow goals to be kicked it. It happens so rarely and the league wants to boost goal scoring anyway. It would instantly remove all the ******** that happens with disallowed goals in the playoffs.
Oh, I'm sure he was calling for the shot... he had Kipper all sorts of messed up.

And, as said, I agree that application of unsportsmanlike conduct is retarded... but if that's what they're telling their officials, then that's what they're telling their officials.

Jester 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 10:39 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.