HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > National Hockey League Talk
National Hockey League Talk Discuss NHL players, teams, games, and the Stanley Cup Playoffs.

Bgoty- mon @ bos ?

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
03-28-2013, 10:27 AM
  #26
MoreOrr
B4
 
MoreOrr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Mexico
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,731
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by lillypad33 View Post
It's not a HORRIBLE call, it's an AUTOMATIC call.
Don't blame the official, blame the league for having it in there in the first place.
Every other call is a judgement one, this one is automatic.
Don't really want to get into it, but did Johnson shoot or bat the puck over the glass or did the puck deflect off of his stick an over the glass?

MoreOrr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-28-2013, 10:30 AM
  #27
Dr Gonzo
#1 Jan Bulis Fan
 
Dr Gonzo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Bat Country
Posts: 4,338
vCash: 500
Even if he batted the puck out without touching the glass, I hate that call. Yes, it's a penalty, but it's a stupid one (Habs fan BTW)

Dr Gonzo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-28-2013, 10:32 AM
  #28
habs03
Subban #Thoroughbred
 
habs03's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 4,650
vCash: 500
The Habs bring out the worse of the Bruins. Its really odd, IMO the Bruins players take the game too personal, they seem to get too emotionally involved in the game, and you can tell with their post game post game comments. While Mtl seems to just play it as if was any other game.

habs03 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-28-2013, 10:34 AM
  #29
Bask
Embellishing User
 
Bask's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Montréal
Posts: 3,469
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MoreOrr View Post
Don't really want to get into it, but did Johnson shoot or bat the puck over the glass or did the puck deflect off of his stick an over the glass?
he batted it, it's a stupid rule if you ask me but it was a legit call

also yeah it was a fun game to watch, but I had just a bit more fun watching that 7-6 non-sense against the Penguins earlier this year

Bask is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-28-2013, 10:38 AM
  #30
Uber Coca
Registered User
 
Uber Coca's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,102
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr Gonzo View Post
Even if he batted the puck out without touching the glass, I hate that call. Yes, it's a penalty, but it's a stupid one (Habs fan BTW)
Yet it prevents from horrible defensive plays like dumping the puck in the stands.

The rule, in its context, is interesting because the players are forced to play the puck. Sure, the penalty last night shouldn't be one because it wasn't intentional. Hockey in general still benefits from this rule. Also, since it's not arbitrary, every team will get some stupid penalties like that from times to times. Last night, well, it happened at the worst possible moment.

Anyway, the Bruins lost because of Montreal's diving, not because of this call.

Uber Coca is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-28-2013, 10:39 AM
  #31
Bask
Embellishing User
 
Bask's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Montréal
Posts: 3,469
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Uber Coca View Post
Yet it prevents from horrible defensive plays like dumping the puck in the stands.

The rule, in its context, is interesting because the players are forced to play the puck. Sure, the penalty last night shouldn't be one because it wasn't intentional. Hockey in general still benefits from this rule. Also, since it's not arbitrary, every team will get some stupid penalties like that from times to times. Last night, well, it happened at the worst possible moment.

Anyway, the Bruins lost because of Montreal's diving, not because of this call.
an offensive zone faceoff seems like enough of a punishement to me, 2 min penalty is just too much

Bask is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-28-2013, 10:41 AM
  #32
MoreOrr
B4
 
MoreOrr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Mexico
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,731
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr Gonzo View Post
Even if he batted the puck out without touching the glass, I hate that call. Yes, it's a penalty, but it's a stupid one (Habs fan BTW)
Either way you look at it, it is a judgement call. Bad enough that a 2 minute penalty exists for it, but when it's an instance where it's not even clear if it's a true case defined by the rule, and a penalty is called that cost the game... It's hard to "appreciate" the game in that context.

I compare it to people who say games used to suck if they ended in the pure Tie; regardless of whether it was an exciting game or not. If ending in a Tie can somehow make a game suck, then losing the game because of crap call can also make a game suck.

Back to the penalty itself, Johnson certainly didn't shoot the puck over the glass, nor did I see evidence that he batted it over the glass. He raised his stick with what looked like the idea of the puck hopefully hitting it and dropping. I didn't see any swinging motion at all,... he just raised his stick and the puck hit it.

MoreOrr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-28-2013, 10:44 AM
  #33
Uber Coca
Registered User
 
Uber Coca's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,102
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by habs03 View Post
The Habs bring out the worse of the Bruins. Its really odd, IMO the Bruins players take the game too personal, they seem to get too emotionally involved in the game, and you can tell with their post game post game comments. While Mtl seems to just play it as if was any other game.
And Chara's IQ is the equivalent of a monkey when playing against Montreal. He always finds a way of taking dumb and undisciplined penalties that cost his team. There's a balance between having passion and being calm, and Chara should reach it in order to be efficient.

Uber Coca is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-28-2013, 10:44 AM
  #34
PricePkPatch
Registered User
 
PricePkPatch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 15,524
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MoreOrr View Post
Either way you look at it, it is a judgement call. Bad enough that a 2 minute penalty exists for it, but when it's an instance where it's not even clear if it's a true case defined by the rule, and a penalty is called that cost the game... It's hard to "appreciate" the game in that context.

I compare it to people who say games used to suck if they ended in the pure Tie; regardless of whether it was an exciting game or not. If ending in a Tie can somehow make a game suck, then losing the game because of crap call can also make a game suck.

Back to the penalty itself, Johnson certainly didn't shoot the puck over the glass, nor did I see evidence that he batted it over the glass. He raised his stick with what looked like the idea of the puck hopefully hitting it and dropping. I didn't see any swinging motion at all,... he just raised his stick and the puck hit it.
I'd say the rules are clearly defined. If it's clearly a deviation from an opponent's pass or shot --> D-zone faceoff.

Otherwise, penalty. Even if it's unintentional; you are responsible for your own stick, you are responsible to where the puck ends up when you touch it.

PricePkPatch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-28-2013, 10:52 AM
  #35
MoreOrr
B4
 
MoreOrr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Mexico
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,731
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by PricePkPatch View Post
I'd say the rules are clearly defined. If it's clearly a deviation from an opponent's pass or shot --> D-zone faceoff.

Otherwise, penalty. Even if it's unintentional; you are responsible for your own stick, you are responsible to where the puck ends up when you touch it.
If they want to call it an intentional deflection, fine. But as I read the rule, it doesn't mention anything about an intentional deflection. And what I mean by "intentional" is purely to "deflect" but not intentionally to deflect out of play.

Certainly Johnson did intentionally try to deflect the puck, but again I didn't see evidence where he batted at it.

MoreOrr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-28-2013, 11:00 AM
  #36
Hnidy Hnight
Registered User
 
Hnidy Hnight's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: North of Boston, MA
Country: United States
Posts: 4,899
vCash: 500
Fantastic game last night. Games like that on US national tv will do wonders for the NHL growth

Hnidy Hnight is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-28-2013, 02:51 PM
  #37
Perrah
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 1,814
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MoreOrr View Post
If they want to call it an intentional deflection, fine. But as I read the rule, it doesn't mention anything about an intentional deflection. And what I mean by "intentional" is purely to "deflect" but not intentionally to deflect out of play.

Certainly Johnson did intentionally try to deflect the puck, but again I didn't see evidence where he batted at it.
The evidence you are looking for is the back swing before he bats the puck over the glass. I dont know if you watched it on TSN or on NBC but it was most definitely a bat. TSN showed it clear as day as Ferraro went on a rant about how it was the right call but the league has to change the rule, to which I would agree for pucks batted out of the air.

Perrah 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 03:10 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.