HFBoards

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

Rangers @ Isles Part 2

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
10-16-2011, 07:48 AM
  #226
chosen
Registered User
 
chosen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 5,710
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by PatientlyWaiting View Post
Keep telling Yourself that. Oh an make it 9 fans, i had a blast! And do we really still think the isles are moving? Roflcopter.
Why the anger?

When a Motteau or Parenteau is a major player there are still some huge holes. In another year or so they could be a force.

chosen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-16-2011, 07:52 AM
  #227
msv957
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 2,051
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by PatientlyWaiting View Post
Keep telling Yourself that. Oh an make it 9 fans, i had a blast! And do we really still think the isles are moving? Roflcopter.
Being humble with a win is a good thing. You should try it.

This is going to be a great rivalry once again with the Rangers winning many, many games against the Islanders in the future. Both team have good young players.

The Rangers young defense is better than the Isles young defense in the future

The Rangers goaltending will be much better for the next half decade or more

The offense on both teams will be very close to each other for a long time.

Edge now and into the future?.... The Rangers

msv957 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-16-2011, 08:24 AM
  #228
bubba5
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 2,018
vCash: 500
Maybe we can give up 10 pp's next game. Make it even harder to win

bubba5 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-16-2011, 08:24 AM
  #229
beastly115
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 10,424
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by boredmale View Post
So you see no problem if a team is up by one goal with 3 minutes left and a player does what Boyle did for a full 3 minutes(because well although it's delaying the game there is no offical rule saying that exact play is delaying the game)? The only argument I might agree with would be they should have blown the whistle after 10 seconds for a faceoff.

I would love to see a replay of the call because I swear although his hand never grabbed the puck his hand(glove) hit it once or twice.
Nope, it's not a problem because it's not against the rules. The official should have called the play dead, not given Boyle a penalty.

beastly115 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-16-2011, 08:34 AM
  #230
eco's bones
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Elmira NY
Country: United States
Posts: 12,765
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by chosen View Post
Why the anger?

When a Motteau or Parenteau is a major player there are still some huge holes. In another year or so they could be a force.
Parenteau is in a very good situation that plays to his strengths with Tavares and Moulson as line mates. This wouldn't be the first time that the chance to play with better players turns a long time journeyman into a consistent producer.

Having Mark Streit back changes the entire dynamic of their defensive corps--makes it much better. Mottau IMO is equal to Eminger. You can get serviceable minutes out of him as long as you don't overplay him. I think the Isles could take a run at the last playoff spot this year especially if guys like Nielsen, Okposo or Bailey take a step up.

I might add that if I had to choose between the current lineups/situations of the Devils or Islanders I would go with the Islanders.


Last edited by eco's bones: 10-16-2011 at 08:40 AM.
eco's bones is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-16-2011, 08:41 AM
  #231
IslesBeBack*
NHL Free Agent
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 5,151
vCash: 500
I'm always humble, and you know what, I am always the first one to say that Henrik is one of the best, etc.

I make a thread on the main board Isles wil be top 5 in scoring, and half the thread is compromised of Ranger fans telling me I'm a moron.

I try to tell Ranger fans that the Islanders aren't a pushover and that the defense is better (if just for a night) than teh defense on the other side, I'm a moron.

I say that Nabby is one of the best regular season goalies of all time, I'm a moron.

I just don't think Islander fans are allowed to say anything good about the team without being lambasted for it. And I don't understand where the anger from Ranger fans comes from that they wish a team would move from a fanbase or that the Islanders only have "9" fans.

We get it. We don't have the fanbase in numbers that you have, but we're just as passionate.

See you next time, and I know I'll get an earfull for coming over here. It will be okay, I promise

IslesBeBack* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-16-2011, 09:06 AM
  #232
eco's bones
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Elmira NY
Country: United States
Posts: 12,765
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by PatientlyWaiting View Post
I'm always humble, and you know what, I am always the first one to say that Henrik is one of the best, etc.

I make a thread on the main board Isles wil be top 5 in scoring, and half the thread is compromised of Ranger fans telling me I'm a moron.

I try to tell Ranger fans that the Islanders aren't a pushover and that the defense is better (if just for a night) than teh defense on the other side, I'm a moron.

I say that Nabby is one of the best regular season goalies of all time, I'm a moron.

I just don't think Islander fans are allowed to say anything good about the team without being lambasted for it. And I don't understand where the anger from Ranger fans comes from that they wish a team would move from a fanbase or that the Islanders only have "9" fans.

We get it. We don't have the fanbase in numbers that you have, but we're just as passionate.

See you next time, and I know I'll get an earfull for coming over here. It will be okay, I promise
I don't know if anyone is always humble. That's a real reach.--but actually your team might be finally taking some really serious steps forward. Capuano at least seems to be very together and focused on how he wants his team to play. Beyond Streit who is as good a two way d-man as there is in the division--Hamonic and MacDonald very young and solid with a couple other really good prospects in the tank--DeHaan comes to mind. You have a really good first line now and elements of a very good second line. Goaltending seems to be a little iffy at the moment though--Nabokov--older and Montoya just getting his feet wet last year. Again I think Bailey, Nielsen, Okposo are keys to how good you will eventually be this year. If Bailey starts playing like a real deal 2nd line center you could go places. At least to me--someone who could really perform that 2nd center role would fill a huge need.

eco's bones is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-16-2011, 10:15 AM
  #233
NHRangerfan
enfoonts
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: New Hampshire
Country: United States
Posts: 3,091
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Renbarg View Post
RE: the Boyle play. it was a tough call but not necessarily bad imo

Here is the rule:




He definitely gathered into his body and did not fall down as a result of a blocked shot. He made no effort to get up and continued to try to keep the puck under him. Admittedly, he never was actually on top of the puck for long but on multiple occasions his palm was on the top of the puck for a half second or so. I imagine the ref was warning him the whole way to move the puck or to get up, he didn't and so the ref called it.
While I think the wording of the rule above is vague, the historical meaning of gathering the puck in has typically been gathering it underneath your body, an example a dman defending a 2 on1 slides between the two players manages to snare the puck and while still laying down pulls it underneath his body.

NHRangerfan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-16-2011, 10:18 AM
  #234
hockeygoon15
Registered User
 
hockeygoon15's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 1,501
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by AlphaQUp View Post
As isle revival pointed out, Boyle didn't do anything against the rules, per se, but he did delay the game. It's much like the "Avery rule" in that there was no rule against what he did but there should probably be some sort of rule enacted or precedent set to avoid this in the future. If they amend the rule to say that player's can't do what Boyle did, that's fine, I have no problem with it. But as the rule stands now, I don't think he did anything wrong.
I dont know. Im pretty sure what he did falls under one of these two categories.

63.1** Delaying the Game A player or a team may be penalized when, in the opinion of the Referee, is delaying the game in any manner.

63.2 A minor penalty shall be imposed on a player other than the goalkeeper who deliberately falls on or gathers the puck into his body. Any player who drops to his knees to block a shot should not be penalized if the puck is shot under him or becomes lodged in his clothing or equipment but any use of the hands to make the puck unplayable should be penalized promptly.

hockeygoon15 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-16-2011, 10:19 AM
  #235
Blueshirt Special
HFBoards Sponsor
 
Blueshirt Special's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 3,207
vCash: 500
With Staal & Sauer in the game, they prevent one of Tavares goals. Different game.

But clearly the isles are a dangerous team.

Also our 2nd line has got to turn it up or we will lose a lot of close games.

Tavares is for real.

Blueshirt Special is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-16-2011, 10:20 AM
  #236
Megustaelhockey
Global Moderator
Happy holidays! :)
 
Megustaelhockey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 6,478
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by hockeygoon15 View Post
I dont know. Im pretty sure what he did falls under one of these two categories.

63.1** Delaying the Game A player or a team may be penalized when, in the opinion of the Referee, is delaying the game in any manner.

63.2 A minor penalty shall be imposed on a player other than the goalkeeper who deliberately falls on or gathers the puck into his body. Any player who drops to his knees to block a shot should not be penalized if the puck is shot under him or becomes lodged in his clothing or equipment but any use of the hands to make the puck unplayable should be penalized promptly.
63.1 is enough to cover this call. I'm sure the ref verbally told him to keep play moving before making the call.

Megustaelhockey is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
10-16-2011, 10:42 AM
  #237
Kevin27nyi
Global Moderator
#21KO
 
Kevin27nyi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 9,464
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by chosen View Post
Why the anger?

When a Motteau or Parenteau is a major player there are still some huge holes. In another year or so they could be a force.
With 14:12 minutes of ice time, Mottau is no major player.

He will likely be scratched for Jurcina once he is healthy too.

Kevin27nyi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-16-2011, 10:45 AM
  #238
beastly115
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 10,424
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by hockeygoon15 View Post
I dont know. Im pretty sure what he did falls under one of these two categories.

63.1** Delaying the Game A player or a team may be penalized when, in the opinion of the Referee, is delaying the game in any manner.

63.2 A minor penalty shall be imposed on a player other than the goalkeeper who deliberately falls on or gathers the puck into his body. Any player who drops to his knees to block a shot should not be penalized if the puck is shot under him or becomes lodged in his clothing or equipment but any use of the hands to make the puck unplayable should be penalized promptly.
Then why isn't there precedent? I've seen players dive on a puck and physically hold it under their body only to see the ref call the play dead and have a faceoff. What about guys like Laraque that would wedge the puck between their skates along the boards and chew up 10-15 secs? The refs should have called the play dead and held a faceoff. That's what should have happened, IMO. Not a penalty.

beastly115 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-16-2011, 11:12 AM
  #239
Renbarg
Registered User
 
Renbarg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: NY
Country: United States
Posts: 9,064
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by HatTrick Swayze View Post
You are describing a scenario where Boyle's frame gives him an advantage (defenders not being able to play it) not one where he is illegally gathering/smothering it under his body.
Lets take this to the extreme then. Are you saying its okay for a player to essentially create a border around the puck (while on the ground which is key) as long as they never smother it?

If he was up on his feet that's a whole different story.

Quote:
Then why isn't there precedent? I've seen players dive on a puck and physically hold it under their body only to see the ref call the play dead and have a faceoff. What about guys like Laraque that would wedge the puck between their skates along the boards and chew up 10-15 secs? The refs should have called the play dead and held a faceoff. That's what should have happened, IMO. Not a penalty.
Notice that the rule allows for players to hold pucks under their body if they are blocking a shot, which could be extended to diving for the puck to defend a shot (or a pass). If Boyle was standing up and wedging the puck with his skates their would be a whistle or something, but it would not be a penalty because he is on his feet.

Its a tough call, and I would hate if it went against the Islanders. However its within the framework of the rules.

Renbarg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-16-2011, 11:13 AM
  #240
Zuccarello Awesome*
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 4,062
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by hockeygoon15 View Post
I dont know. Im pretty sure what he did falls under one of these two categories.

63.1** Delaying the Game A player or a team may be penalized when, in the opinion of the Referee, is delaying the game in any manner.

63.2 A minor penalty shall be imposed on a player other than the goalkeeper who deliberately falls on or gathers the puck into his body. Any player who drops to his knees to block a shot should not be penalized if the puck is shot under him or becomes lodged in his clothing or equipment but any use of the hands to make the puck unplayable should be penalized promptly.
If that were the case, why aren't there penalties called every time a player deliberately delays the game by waiting behind his own net for a line change? What about every time a player on a penalty kill shoots the puck down the ice? Actually, every icing should be a two minute penalty, according to that first rule. What about a player using his skate to hold the puck against the boards to kill time off the clock?

What Boyle did is no different than a penalty killer kicking the puck back and forth between his skates while pinned along the boards. Is that EVER called a penalty? As long as he didn't close his hand on the puck or pull it underneath his body and lay on it, its not even close to a penalty. We've seen the same play thousands of times and every other time the ref blows it dead after a few seconds and calls for a faceoff. Those of you saying "gee well it's a tough call" are...well...complete morons.

Zuccarello Awesome* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-16-2011, 11:16 AM
  #241
azrok22
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 9,451
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zuccarello Awesome View Post
If that were the case, why aren't there penalties called every time a player deliberately delays the game by waiting behind his own net for a line change? What about every time a player on a penalty kill shoots the puck down the ice? Actually, every icing should be a two minute penalty, according to that first rule. What about a player using his skate to hold the puck against the boards to kill time off the clock?

What Boyle did is no different than a penalty killer kicking the puck back and forth between his skates while pinned along the boards. Is that EVER called a penalty? As long as he didn't close his hand on the puck or pull it underneath his body and lay on it, its not even close to a penalty. We've seen the same play thousands of times and every other time the ref blows it dead after a few seconds and calls for a faceoff. Those of you saying "gee well it's a tough call" are...well...complete morons.
I was as livid about that call as the next guy yesterday, and didn't see it on the TV, but at least Brooks makes it seem like Boyle actually closed his hand on the puck, making it the correct call.

Quote:
"I can't take penalties like that," said Boyle, who closed his hand on the puck while the Rangers already were a man down in the second for a delay of game penalty signifying his fourth minor in three games and who later lost the faceoff preceding Tavares' winner. "I expect more from myself, in every situation.
http://www.nypost.com/p/sports/range...#ixzz1axSz5HMN

azrok22 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-16-2011, 11:21 AM
  #242
Zuccarello Awesome*
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 4,062
vCash: 500
Furthermore, let's get past the ridiulous boyle penalty because even though it led to a goal, it's not really the reason we lost.

Why did we lose?

Three reasons.

1. Their defense outplayed ours. Missing both Staal and Sauer hurts a LOT.

2. Tortorella is consistently outcoached by AHL level coaches like jack capuano. Screaming at Henke to get to the bench with nearly two minutes left and not even drawing up a set play until AFTER the isles score an empty netter?? That was sooo embarrassing. Horrible coaching. Tortorella is nothing but a hypocritical yeller and line juggler. He has zero ability to devise a tactical gameplan either before or during games. And what the hell does mike Sullivan do in between games with this team? Do they practice wii bowling? Because it's certainly not a powerplay or any type of cohesive offensive gameplan. They had a week to recover from Europe and to learn their linemates and we couldn't establish any type of quality zone time. If not for a fluke breakdown (gaborik's breakaway) and a fluke matteau-esque goal by Prust, we lose this game 3-0.

3. We took 8 penalties, at least 6 of which were legit, obvious calls. Part of it goes back to reason #1 but still, if the islanders can play with discipline, we have to be able to. No excuse.

Zuccarello Awesome* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-16-2011, 11:29 AM
  #243
Zuccarello Awesome*
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 4,062
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Megustaelhockey View Post
63.1 is enough to cover this call. I'm sure the ref verbally told him to keep play moving before making the call.
63.1 could cover dozens of routine legal plays that are never ever penalize. So I really don't think that's a good barometer.

And what rule exactly says that during a play, a player must follow orders from the ref on what to do with the puck, when he's not doing anything illegal to begin with?

Is there some rule that you're allowed to do what boyle did for ten seconds but not for eleven?

If you're killing a 5 on 3 and youre pinning the puck along the boards and the ref is telling you, "keep it moving!" do you just kick the puck free to the opposition and let them score a goal? The red saying "keep it moving" is never a threat that if you don't, he'll call a penalty. It's that if you don't keep it moving, he's going to blow it dead in a few seconds and re-drop the puck, thus preventing you from killing off an entire two minutes this way. my goodness, this has to be the most ridiculously obvious thing I've ever actually had the need to explain to some very ignorant posters in all my time here. Did a lot of you just start watching hockey this year? That would certainly explain it, except some of you have high post counts. Mind-bottling.

Zuccarello Awesome* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-16-2011, 11:29 AM
  #244
Jabroni
The People's Champ
 
Jabroni's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Country: United States
Posts: 6,830
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zuccarello Awesome View Post
Furthermore, let's get past the ridiulous boyle penalty because even though it led to a goal, it's not really the reason we lost.

Why did we lose?

Three reasons.

1. Their defense outplayed ours. Missing both Staal and Sauer hurts a LOT.

2. Tortorella is consistently outcoached by AHL level coaches like jack capuano. Screaming at Henke to get to the bench with nearly two minutes left and not even drawing up a set play until AFTER the isles score an empty netter?? That was sooo embarrassing. Horrible coaching. Tortorella is nothing but a hypocritical yeller and line juggler. He has zero ability to devise a tactical gameplan either before or during games. And what the hell does mike Sullivan do in between games with this team? Do they practice wii bowling? Because it's certainly not a powerplay or any type of cohesive offensive gameplan. They had a week to recover from Europe and to learn their linemates and we couldn't establish any type of quality zone time. If not for a fluke breakdown (gaborik's breakaway) and a fluke matteau-esque goal by Prust, we lose this game 3-0.

3. We took 8 penalties, at least 6 of which were legit, obvious calls. Part of it goes back to reason #1 but still, if the islanders can play with discipline, we have to be able to. No excuse.
Another huge reason was the start to the game.

Dubinsky's penalty in the first five minutes and the subsequent penalties after that killed the momentum we could've had.

The starts in the past 3 games have hurt us; even though no one scored, it completely deflates the flow and momentum.

Jabroni is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-16-2011, 11:32 AM
  #245
Zuccarello Awesome*
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 4,062
vCash: 500
Edit: double post. Sorry.

Zuccarello Awesome* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-16-2011, 11:33 AM
  #246
Zuccarello Awesome*
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 4,062
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by azrok22 View Post
I was as livid about that call as the next guy yesterday, and didn't see it on the TV, but at least Brooks makes it seem like Boyle actually closed his hand on the puck, making it the correct call.



http://www.nypost.com/p/sports/range...#ixzz1axSz5HMN
I think that's more of Boyle just saying the PC thing to the media. I didn't see him close his hand on the puck, and I think that's probably more of Brooks being too lazy to describe the play in detail so he just writes "closed hand on puck." It also certainly didn't seem like the ref told him it was for that based on Boyles confused and irate reaction on his way to the box. Oh well.

Zuccarello Awesome* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-16-2011, 11:36 AM
  #247
Megustaelhockey
Global Moderator
Happy holidays! :)
 
Megustaelhockey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 6,478
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zuccarello Awesome View Post
And what rule exactly says that during a play, a player must follow orders from the ref on what to do with the puck, when he's not doing anything illegal to begin with?
31.2 Disputes - The Referees shall have general supervision of the game and shall have full control of all game officials and players during the game, including stoppages; and in case of any dispute, their decision shall be final.


Megustaelhockey is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
10-16-2011, 12:13 PM
  #248
pwoz
Registered User
 
pwoz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: NJ
Posts: 2,534
vCash: 500
Glad I missed this stinker. I was attending a family wedding so could only check stats on my phone randomly.

pwoz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-16-2011, 12:43 PM
  #249
klingsor
HFBoards Sponsor
 
klingsor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Manhattan
Posts: 14,118
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blueshirt Special View Post
With Staal & Sauer in the game, they prevent one of Tavares goals. Different game.

But clearly the isles are a dangerous team.

Also our 2nd line has got to turn it up or we will lose a lot of close games.

Tavares is for real.
That about sums it up for me.

klingsor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-16-2011, 12:51 PM
  #250
Drewbackatu*
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 3,048
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by chosen View Post
Why the anger?

When a Motteau or Parenteau is a major player there are still some huge holes. In another year or so they could be a force.
What is wrong with Parenteau being a major point producer(not player) on the Islanders? Why, bc he couldn't get a sniff in our vaunted, all star lineup and, as a result, was stuck in Hartford/Conn all those years? He must feel like he died and went to heaven playing with Tavares(especially) and Moulson now. Wanna bet he puts up more points than everyone in our lineup except 2 to 4 players(max).
Some of you fans kill me with your blind loyality to the Rangers.

Drewbackatu* 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 09:33 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.