HFBoards

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

The refs yesterday...

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
11-23-2006, 12:56 PM
  #1
ppil
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Quebec
Country: Canada
Posts: 646
vCash: 500
The refs yesterday...

The Wild's players were saying that they had lost the game to Huet and the refs, imo it was the same for both side, I'm I too bias?

ppil is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-23-2006, 12:58 PM
  #2
coolguy21415
HFBoards Sponsor
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Country: Vietnam
Posts: 9,285
vCash: 500
Does anyone know what the Wild assistant coach/trainer did to get ejected? It usually takes a lot of abuse for a coach to get ejected from the game. I don't even understand what he was complaining about at that point in the game.

__________________
This content is hosted here with the objections of the poster.
coolguy21415 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-23-2006, 01:02 PM
  #3
Whitesnake
Habs of steel
 
Whitesnake's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Lorraine, QC
Country: Canada
Posts: 48,760
vCash: 500
I guess it mainly has to do with number of penalties given in the 3rd. They had 4, (well last one doesn't count really) we had 1.....

'Cause for the whole game, it's pretty much equivalent.

Whitesnake is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-23-2006, 01:03 PM
  #4
GoneAway
Guest
 
Country:
Posts: n/a
vCash:
I think the main beef here is that they thought Backstrom had the puck frozen on Bonk's goal

  Reply With Quote
Old
11-23-2006, 01:05 PM
  #5
Whitesnake
Habs of steel
 
Whitesnake's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Lorraine, QC
Country: Canada
Posts: 48,760
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lord Chezz View Post
I think the main beef here is that they thought Backstrom had the puck frozen on Bonk's goal
oops....forgot that one.....so add this to the penalties, and you have the reasons why.....

Whitesnake is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-23-2006, 01:05 PM
  #6
Guy Caballero
Registered User
 
Guy Caballero's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,855
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ppil View Post
The Wild's players were saying that they had lost the game to Huet and the refs, imo it was the same for both side, I'm I too bias?
Let me guess...Rolston was one of the criers?

Guy Caballero is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-23-2006, 01:08 PM
  #7
ppil
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Quebec
Country: Canada
Posts: 646
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Guy Caballero View Post
Let me guess...Rolston was one of the criers?
Well, they interviewed mostly french players aka Dupuis and Veilleux and when they tried to talk to Lemaire he said that he was too frustrated to talk and he would get into trouble if he was talking.

ppil is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-23-2006, 01:10 PM
  #8
coolguy21415
HFBoards Sponsor
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Country: Vietnam
Posts: 9,285
vCash: 500
Goalies shouldn't be counting on freezing their puck with just their glove when sprawled out on the ice. It's as much Backstrom's fault as it is the ref's, who was rushing over to blow the play dead as Bonk fished it out of Backstrom's glove.

In my experience watching hockey, refs will let play go a little longer in a scrum like that, because the puck is usually loose. I know the rules state that when he loses sight of the puck, play should be whistled, but you don't garner the benefit of the doubt when you've already taken a diving penalty in the game. Backstrom should have drawn the puck toward him to show the refs he had it, instead of laying there still.

coolguy21415 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-23-2006, 01:14 PM
  #9
Bronn
Registered Sellsword
 
Bronn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Highest Bidder
Posts: 10,996
vCash: 500
The diving penalties sure were retarded , especially the one on Backstrom.

I mean you cannot give a diving penalty to a player if you also give a tripping/holding/obstruction penalty to the other player.It defies all logic imho and it happened a few times last night.

Bronn is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
11-23-2006, 01:15 PM
  #10
ppil
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Quebec
Country: Canada
Posts: 646
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lord Chezz View Post
I think the main beef here is that they thought Backstrom had the puck frozen on Bonk's goal
Villeneuve said on 110% that he had been told what the coach said to get ejected from the game and it was about the diving calls, but I think that of the three, the Plekanec one was the one who was not really a dive but Plekanec always watch the ref instantly when he falls, like if he was falling to get a call.

ppil is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-23-2006, 01:20 PM
  #11
ppil
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Quebec
Country: Canada
Posts: 646
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Dark Side View Post
The diving penalties sure were retarded , especially the one on Backstrom.

I mean you cannot give a diving penalty to a player if you also give a tripping/holding/obstruction penalty to the other player.It defies all logic imho andfit happened a few times last night.
They don't really give diving calls, it's more acting calls, if you do anything to get a call from the ref you get a diving call, that's why it's almost always the same players who get those calls. Bonk barely touched Backstrom, it was obstruction for sure but to make sur the ref saw it Backstrom fell on the ice that's why he got called for diving, cause even my grand mother could have stayed up on that play.

ppil is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-23-2006, 01:30 PM
  #12
!nkubus
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Laval, QC
Posts: 870
vCash: 500
and on a non biased point of view the puck wasn't frozen at all, the goalie never had possesion of the puck for more than a second so the ref did a great job at not calling this like he did 3 times against Atlanta last saturday night.

!nkubus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-23-2006, 01:32 PM
  #13
coolguy21415
HFBoards Sponsor
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Country: Vietnam
Posts: 9,285
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ppil View Post
They don't really give diving calls, it's more acting calls, if you do anything to get a call from the ref you get a diving call, that's why it's almost always the same players who get those calls. Bonk barely touched Backstrom, it was obstruction for sure but to make sur the ref saw it Backstrom fell on the ice that's why he got called for diving, cause even my grand mother could have stayed up on that play.
See and that's where I would disagree. What was Bonk supposed to do there to not obstruct him? I figure so long as he doesn't hinder the goalie's movement back to the net (which Bonk really didn't) and the goalie stays up, it shouldn't be a penalty. I think goalies are protected too much, they're protected as though they're made of glass.

coolguy21415 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-23-2006, 01:42 PM
  #14
Guy Caballero
Registered User
 
Guy Caballero's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,855
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ppil View Post
Bonk barely touched Backstrom, it was obstruction for sure but to make sur the ref saw it Backstrom fell on the ice that's why he got called for diving, cause even my grand mother could have stayed up on that play.
Agreed, but in that case why not just let play continue? In soccer, when there's a clear dive or embellishment, the ref just shakes his head and the player on the ground gets up. It's less disruptive that way. It should be the same in hockey in most cases. That, or just call the dive if you really want it to stop. Don't call the other player as well if you wouldn't have if the other player hadn't taken a dive.

Guy Caballero is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-23-2006, 01:55 PM
  #15
Whitesnake
Habs of steel
 
Whitesnake's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Lorraine, QC
Country: Canada
Posts: 48,760
vCash: 500
I think it was really clear that Backstrom has no idea that he had partially the puck under his glove, and you could clearly see the puck with that on-top view. But for the times that they clearly stop the play when the puck was loose, I guess it was our turn.....

Whitesnake is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-23-2006, 01:56 PM
  #16
IcE ColD
Registered User
 
IcE ColD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Vieux Port Inc.
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,848
vCash: 500
Send a message via MSN to IcE ColD
Quote:
Originally Posted by Guy Caballero View Post
Agreed, but in that case why not just let play continue? In soccer, when there's a clear dive or embellishment, the ref just shakes his head and the player on the ground gets up. It's less disruptive that way. It should be the same in hockey in most cases. That, or just call the dive if you really want it to stop. Don't call the other player as well if you wouldn't have if the other player hadn't taken a dive.
I dunno. From what I understand of the application of the rule, once a player stick touches an opponent and is parallel to the ice, the player automatically gets 2 minutes for holding. If the ref consider the opponent has dived, the opponent will also get a 2 minutes for diving. Sounds silly, but that's how they apply the rule. Just see it as 2 different calls on the same play.

IcE ColD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-23-2006, 02:01 PM
  #17
HH
GO HABS GO!
 
HH's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,300
vCash: 500
I heard Jacques Demers say on CKAC this morning that it may have been offside before the Bonk goal and thats what the Minnesota coach argued about.


Last edited by HH: 11-23-2006 at 02:15 PM.
HH is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-23-2006, 02:08 PM
  #18
TheHoser
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: English Quebec
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,307
vCash: 500
The only diving call that was really a dive was the Parrish one; that was emberassing, he grabbed hold of Rivet's stick and then just threw himself at the ice. It wasn't a dive on Backstrom, but it wasn't an interferance call either... If he's not in his crease you can rough him up a bit as long as he has the puck, although it's rarley called that way. And the Plekanec call looked more like he fell then he was tripped, I don't think it was a dive or a trip.

TheHoser is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-23-2006, 02:12 PM
  #19
TheHoser
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: English Quebec
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,307
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Guy Caballero View Post
Agreed, but in that case why not just let play continue? In soccer, when there's a clear dive or embellishment, the ref just shakes his head and the player on the ground gets up. It's less disruptive that way. It should be the same in hockey in most cases. That, or just call the dive if you really want it to stop. Don't call the other player as well if you wouldn't have if the other player hadn't taken a dive.
The last thing we want to do is take pointers from Soccer.

TheHoser is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-23-2006, 02:14 PM
  #20
White Snake*
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 267
vCash: 500
First of Jacques Lemaire and others should be embarassed with themselves. Crying like a bunch of sissy's. Calls went both ways good and bad. Heck the habs have been on the short end many of times(mainly in toronto) and we dont throw little hissy fits. As for Rolston it would not surprise me if he was whinning, he is just upset he can never win in Montreal. I guess his Boston days are still haunting him.

White Snake* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-23-2006, 02:21 PM
  #21
coolguy21415
HFBoards Sponsor
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Country: Vietnam
Posts: 9,285
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheHoser View Post
The last thing we want to do is take pointers from Soccer.
Yeah the most popular sport on the planet. Wouldn't want to take pointers from that at all...

I was just looking through the official rulebook, and there's no rule that I could see governing how officials are supposed to call puck freezes. Does anyone know if there are official guidelines about goalies freezing pucks?

coolguy21415 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-23-2006, 02:26 PM
  #22
TheHoser
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: English Quebec
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,307
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by RedScull View Post
Yeah the most popular sport on the planet. Wouldn't want to take pointers from that at all...
It's the most popular sport based on the fact that it's easily acessible to even the poorest... It's less eventful then baseball and the diving is emberassing. The last thing we want to do is make hockey anything like soccer.

TheHoser is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-23-2006, 02:27 PM
  #23
Habs
Registered User
 
Habs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,399
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by RedScull View Post
Yeah the most popular sport on the planet. Wouldn't want to take pointers from that at all...
What does the popularity of the game, have to do with the fact, Soccer players are the most pathetic divers on the planet?

Habs is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-23-2006, 02:27 PM
  #24
ppil
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Quebec
Country: Canada
Posts: 646
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Guy Caballero View Post
Agreed, but in that case why not just let play continue? In soccer, when there's a clear dive or embellishment, the ref just shakes his head and the player on the ground gets up. It's less disruptive that way. It should be the same in hockey in most cases. That, or just call the dive if you really want it to stop. Don't call the other player as well if you wouldn't have if the other player hadn't taken a dive.
They let the play go in soccer cause they can't give 2 free kicks, but I agree that they should let the play continue.

ppil is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-23-2006, 02:35 PM
  #25
tinyzombies
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Calif via Montreal
Posts: 11,576
vCash: 500
I thought the refs were tilted against us early in the game, but made up for it later, unfortunately for Minnesota. So I agree with Lemaire or whoever said that.

That last powerplay we had, where Perezhogin was tripped WAS a dive. And not only that, but they missed the hooking call on Bonk just second before that when Minnesota was breaking out of their zone. It was right in front of the ref too. They HAD to call the Perez trip though because it was too blatant, but I don't think the refs were in good position to see if it was a dive or not. Clearly on the replay it was a one handed slash to the shinpads and he crumpled like he was shot.

Good for us, and it's long overdue. Because the refs have been on our case all year.

And what was up with that faceoff that was taken out to center-ice when we clearly were given a powerplay in their zone? Faceoff should have been deep. Carbonneau was laughing on that one, he had given up complaining...

tinyzombies 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 12:57 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.