__________________
"It has not been a good day. I lost my glasses early this morning and I had to go buy a pair of 79 dollar reading glasses today. 79 bucks. You can literally get them at Costco, three-for-20." - Darryl Sutter's response to going up 2-0 in the series.
Mike Murphy has got to be steaming right now. The ref called the last game a good goal and this one he blew the whistle so it was impossible to overturn.
The good thing for you guys is any 1 p.m. weirdness (seriously, a 1 p.m. game? Weird) is more than equaled out by our suckitude. The only reason we win games is to somehow buy Arniel and Howson more time before they start collecting unemployment checks.
One thing I've noticed about our team is we will start strong but fizzle out so if you can withstand us for a bit -- even if we score a goal or two -- there's no worries because we tend to collapse and you'll make all the ground back up. If you score late in a period it can be a mental edge because we give up so many late period goals it's not funny.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Moses Doughty
Toronto didnt change it
Toronto hates us so no worries there.
Quote:
Originally Posted by RH63
FWIW, I thought that was a goal.
You should have wished it was a goal and that we went up 2-0 with another quick goal after that. Then it guarantees you guys a win because we suck at holding leads.
LOL no way that could have been called a goal, imagine that's called a goal, all they have to do now is put someone behind the net, push it foward until it affects the goalie, and then slide it in?
You should have wished it was a goal and that we went up 2-0 with another quick goal after that. Then it guarantees you guys a win because we suck at holding leads.
We don't score 3 goals so, we would have forfeited after the 2nd goal.
Think that should have been a goal. Reviewed it on the DVR, and the puck seemed to cross the line before the whistle. Unless, of course, the officials use the whole we meant to blow the whistle earlier thing.
LOL no way that could have been called a goal, imagine that's called a goal, all they have to do now is put someone behind the net, push it foward until it affects the goalie, and then slide it in?
Cmon, were people actually worried about that?
It was the result of a hit by Mitchell. Sure the player shouldn't have grabbed the net, but it is not like he was standing there back there alone lifting the net. Even then, what would that prove? If it becomes a nuisance to the goalie, they will blow it down as a delay of game penalty, but it doesn't do anything but make them down a man while someone stands by the net and lifts it up... It would still be a goal if the goalie was unhindered and the puck was put in between the pipes and crosses the line. The goal doesn't have to be all the way down.
