Game misconduct for fighting after an altercation.
__________________
"Trust me I'm an expert, I watched 13 rangers games on NHL center Ice this year through streaming." -Starburst
"I don't even understand what the point of all this arguing is. Are you guys hoping that the other side is going to have an epiphany and go 'Oh, OH! You're right, we ARE going to lose this series!'" -Crease
Good: Third period shutdown, first period onslaught, Callahan's reaction to the hit (how aren't more people giving him a star? 1st period too long ago I guess)
Bad: Powerplay (even though props to MTL PK), 2nd period sloppiness
Redden: John Giannone, Al actually asking McD about Leetch comparisons, Montreal fans on the main board
via CBC feed... after the ENG they showed Cally being attended to by the trainer. Looked to be his wrist was bothering him. Didn't like the look of it, one bit.
I thought they had a great first, and were very pedestrian for the rest of the game. Thought Lundqvist was shaky all game, and Eminger was a heart attack every other shift. Definitely thrilled with the outcome, not with the performance though.
I'd have the same 3 stars however, maybe substitute Richards for MDZ. Played 27 minutes, was a rock, and scored a great goal.
They played a very disciplined, simple game in the third, specifically. Heart attack scary near the end, but, for the most part, it was a simply, smartly played game. They controlled the puck, transitioned well, and cut down on the NZ turnovers. The type of game they have to play against the Canadiens.
I missed the game, sadly. But I see Avery barely got any ice time. Did something happen, or did Torts just hate him?
Torts didn't play the 4th line very much. Christensen got PP time so he probably got more icetime than Avery and Deveaux cuz of that
Callahan was getting some attention from Ramsey on the bench after his EN goal. Earlier in the period he tried to check Subban and missed, looked kinda awkward and a bit slow to the bench, might have hurt his arm/shoulder...hopefully noting serious
They played a very disciplined, simple game in the third, specifically. Heart attack scary near the end, but, for the most part, it was a simply, smartly played game. They controlled the puck, transitioned well, and cut down on the NZ turnovers. The type of game they have to play against the Canadiens.
At the end of the game, I kept on reminding myself how many times the Rangers have been down 2 goals in the third, had a lackluster 3rd, but got within 1 late and still lost. It kept me from freaking out.
Nothing in the rulebook spells out the too many men and interference penalty, but here's my take.
Too many men is pretty obvious. 2 minute bench, but the whistle isn't suppose to go till Montreal touches the puck. So the play would still go on, no whistle yet.
The Rangers are going in on a 3 on 2 until a player illegally on the ice "interferes" with the play by checking the puck carrier. Even though the hit was of the legal variety is was called interference because that player was illegally on the ice.
The actions of Blundell interfered with a Rangers odd man rush, hence the interference penalty.
