HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Western Conference > Pacific Division > Arizona Coyotes
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

Game 62 | Phoenix Coyotes @ Edmonton Oilers | February 25, 2012 | 2:00 PM

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
02-26-2012, 12:50 PM
  #151
kihekah19
Registered User
 
kihekah19's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Phoenix, Arizona
Country: United States
Posts: 2,223
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BUX7PHX View Post

I still haven't seen the "switch" go on for Vermette quite yet - he is getting some chances, but also looks a little timid out there. I'm waiting another 3-4 games before I expect him to flip that on automatic - he'll have had enough practice time and games with us by then...

I'm not sure there will be any "switch" that goes on for Vermette. That line is now a much greater scoring threat, not only in Vermette, but because his presence opens things up for his line mates. He's also playing a responsible defensive game. Having said all that, yes I expect things will only get better.

Another player you and I have discussed is Stone and I've seen three quality performances of four.... impressive. Granted is toi is limited (as it should be), but from where I thought he was in camp, I'm very pleased...

kihekah19 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-26-2012, 01:00 PM
  #152
kihekah19
Registered User
 
kihekah19's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Phoenix, Arizona
Country: United States
Posts: 2,223
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Naych_PHX View Post
Its hard to believe Hanzal only got 10 assists last season. That was such an anomaly.

Marty's potential is.... I don't know if limitless is a good word, but hear this out:

Two, three years ago on the azcentral boards a girl known as stephanielovesbryz stated that she thought Marty could become "our Joe Thornton". Everyone, but I ridiculed her. He's got play making potential and while he may not rise to Thornton numbers, I felt "our Joe Thornton" meant that he could be a big contributor offensively by garnering assists. Time will tell and he may go about it differently, but I still think the little lady may have been on to something.

kihekah19 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-26-2012, 01:05 PM
  #153
kihekah19
Registered User
 
kihekah19's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Phoenix, Arizona
Country: United States
Posts: 2,223
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Naych_PHX View Post

I like that we're gradually giving more ice time to Summers-Stone. Last couple games the top four guys have been goin above 22/24min a game. Was a bit lower this game. As much as I root for Stone/Summers, we need someone experienced back there. If ONE of ours Dmen who are MIA return, that would help immensely. We could potentially get three guys back by the end of the year.

Agreed, they are performing admirably and it's great that they are getting some quality experience, but we could use our more experienced players.

kihekah19 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-26-2012, 01:07 PM
  #154
kihekah19
Registered User
 
kihekah19's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Phoenix, Arizona
Country: United States
Posts: 2,223
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kaizen View Post
That didn't count - "intent to blow the whistle"

I have no problem with intent to blow the whistle, but that call would have been made on the ice, NOT the booth.

kihekah19 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-26-2012, 01:43 PM
  #155
okiepig
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: East of the Kaluts
Country: United States
Posts: 163
vCash: 500
I actually see Martin Hanzal as the "anti Joe Thorton player" as well as the anti big impact player across the league- Joe has simply been taken out of the equation when we play them... he has done the same with nearly every first line impact player the Coyotes face...
I consider him the heart and soul of this team. yeah, that was maybe or not a quick whistle but it would have been a goal without the confusion, refs are human too...
someone looks very happy to be playing somewhere else than Columbus.

okiepig is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-26-2012, 02:00 PM
  #156
Sciamachy
Formerly Sceva Sct
 
Sciamachy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: wanderer
Posts: 1,726
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by kihekah19 View Post
I have no problem with intent to blow the whistle, but that call would have been made on the ice, NOT the booth.

http://coyotes.nhl.com/club/recap.ht...id=DL|PHX|home


Quote:
Center Antoine Vermette....nearly scored his first goal with Phoenix in the first period but the goal was disallowed after a video review. What follows is the official ruling from the NHL:

"At 6:16 of the first period in the Coyotes/Oilers game, the Toronto situation room initiated a review after Lauri Korpikoski's shot was stopped but Antoine Vermette poked the rebound into the net. The referee informed the video room that he had been in the act of blowing the whistle after the save on the original shot by Korpikoski and prior to the Vermette shot. The referee's call on the ice stands. No Goal Phoenix."

Sciamachy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-26-2012, 03:20 PM
  #157
TeamTippett
Formally TeamTurris
 
TeamTippett's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Phx
Country: United States
Posts: 5,325
vCash: 500
The bigger fault was that the puck wasn't in the goalies control. On tv we could see that the puck was still active. The play shouldn't have been blown dead

TeamTippett is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-26-2012, 05:39 PM
  #158
okiepig
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: East of the Kaluts
Country: United States
Posts: 163
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TeamTippett View Post
The bigger fault was that the puck wasn't in the goalies control. On tv we could see that the puck was still active. The play shouldn't have been blown dead
except for that pesky rule about when an official loses sight of the puck, bottom line is it was just another blown play by the official- everyone gets them.. but for the most part it works out a draw over a season .. Vermette knows what time it is, he gonna be jus' fine as a Yote.

okiepig is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-26-2012, 06:46 PM
  #159
kihekah19
Registered User
 
kihekah19's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Phoenix, Arizona
Country: United States
Posts: 2,223
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by okiepig View Post
I actually see Martin Hanzal as the "anti Joe Thorton player" as well as the anti big impact player across the league- Joe has simply been taken out of the equation when we play them... he has done the same with nearly every first line impact player the Coyotes face...
I consider him the heart and soul of this team.

That's the point (I think) of "our Joe Thornton"... ridiculous defense with playmaking ability that is somewhat similar to big Joe.

kihekah19 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-26-2012, 06:48 PM
  #160
kihekah19
Registered User
 
kihekah19's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Phoenix, Arizona
Country: United States
Posts: 2,223
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sceva Sct View Post


Should have never gone to the booth then.... they called it a goal on the ice. Apparently the official who didn't signal a goal had the intent.

kihekah19 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-26-2012, 10:45 PM
  #161
CitizenCoyote
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 1,610
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by kihekah19 View Post
Should have never gone to the booth then.... they called it a goal on the ice. Apparently the official who didn't signal a goal had the intent.
That happens from time to time. Once they get buzzed they have to talk to Toronto. Sometimes Toronto wants to know the call to see if it is reviewable. This happened in the Dallas v. Phoenix game where the call on the ice was a pass with a high stick before it was tipped in. Toronto buzzed and the referee told them he called it on the pass, which made it an unreviewable judgment call. They still needed to deal with Toronto because they got buzzed.

CitizenCoyote is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-27-2012, 08:09 AM
  #162
XX
Lots of Try
 
XX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Executionville
Country: United States
Posts: 28,372
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by okiepig View Post
except for that pesky rule about when an official loses sight of the puck, bottom line is it was just another blown play by the official- everyone gets them.. but for the most part it works out a draw over a season .. Vermette knows what time it is, he gonna be jus' fine as a Yote.
I have a problem with the official out at center ice blowing a play dead over the ref who is behind the net (and called the goal) The process itself is fine, even with the 'intent' grey area. It just ends up being the wrong ref or linesman making a call in the vast majority of controversial situations. None of the players thought the play was dead, and neither did the ref with a clear view of where the puck was. In this sort of situation common sense should overrule strict adherence to guidelines. Another official has a differing opinion, and in this case was actually in a better position. He should have the final on ice call.

XX is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
02-27-2012, 10:21 AM
  #163
okiepig
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: East of the Kaluts
Country: United States
Posts: 163
vCash: 500
Of course the play was blown quick looking back, but I have never watched a perfectly called game in my life- when you start wandering off away from the "strict adherence to guidelines" approach it opens up that can of what we all hate, refs accused of affecting the game's outcome.
I have been pretty happy how the NHL refs are allowing teams to play the game this season, remember a couple of years ago when every little stick infraction was pulling a hooking call?- consistency in managing games has been pretty good all season long if you ask me.
Mick McGeouh on a typical night would regularly ignore aggravated assault with intent right in front of him while calling a holding the stick at the other end of the ice at least once a night... remember??
at least he was consistent...
as to that call, the ref behind the net's view is going to be blocked in frozen pucks in front of the net, I suppose he lost sight a second or two before the one that had sight of the puck blew that whistle- so I suppose he could have blown the whistle way before if the rule was strictly adhered to the letter... gotta keep the game in perspective.
I am a big Vermette fan and I thought the eventual call was correct.

okiepig 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 03:17 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.