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

4pts lost. this is what I'm hearing about our coaches?

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
10-21-2008, 03:07 PM
  #1
gravytrain6t
Registered User
 
gravytrain6t's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Long Island
Country: United States
Posts: 2,867
vCash: 500
4pts lost. this is what I'm hearing about our coaches?

So far i heard in a post that Rismiller cost us a chance to at least get a point or two against Dallas because he failed to get the puck out of the zone and he was playing lazy along side Naslund and Drury at the time of Modano's goal. And the only reason for Rissmiller being on this line was so he could be used as a show case for scouts of other teams? BTW i just watched the replay on that goal and not only did Rismiller not work hard to get the puck out of the zone he left a super star center wide open in the slot and just decided to stand there and do nothing. He easily could have covered Modano on that play and broken up that shot. There was a d man down low. When i watch the re play, I just feel bad for Lundqvuist as he didn't have a chance on that blast. And then in Detroit Renney and staff made it a terrible time to take a too many men call at the most crucial point of the game. I heard Renney complaining the bench was too small or something and they couldn't get the gate open because of the congestion of too many players. The player tried to hop over the small bench but he could not. Well IDK. Next time we go to Detroit we might want to practice climbing over benches and learning how to properly open up the gate so the guy could get in. Well on a good note. None of these factors will come into play for the rest of the season. I mean at least not involving line changes in Detroit and having Rissmiller on the team

gravytrain6t is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-21-2008, 03:13 PM
  #2
LyNX27
Registered User
 
LyNX27's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Wisconsin
Country: United States
Posts: 2,268
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by gravytrain6t View Post
So far i heard in a post that Rismiller cost us a chance to at least get a point or two against Dallas because he failed to get the puck out of the zone and he was playing lazy along side Naslund and Drury at the time of Modano's goal. And the only reason for Rissmiller being on this line was so he could be used as a show case for scouts of other teams? BTW i just watched the replay on that goal and not only did Rismiller not work hard to get the puck out of the zone he left a super star center wide open in the slot and just decided to stand there and do nothing. He easily could have covered Modano on that play and broken up that shot. There was a d man down low. When i watch the re play, I just feel bad for Lundqvuist as he didn't have a chance on that blast. And then in Detroit Renney and staff made it a terrible time to take a too many men call at the most crucial point of the game. I heard Renney complaining the bench was too small or something and they couldn't get the gate open because of the congestion of too many players. The player tried to hop over the small bench but he could not. Well IDK. Next time we go to Detroit we might want to practice climbing over benches and learning how to properly open up the gate so the guy could get in. Well on a good note. None of these factors will come into play for the rest of the season. I mean at least not involving line changes in Detroit and having Rissmiller on the team
Dressing Rissmiller for a game was like putting up a mannequin... it's just there, it doesn't do anything productive, it just takes up a space there. So why would we have his non-productive stand out self there, when we can have a speedy player with a shot like Fritsche, or even Prucha, getting chances, if not goals. Korpikoski even, help him grow, and his defensive abilities would have come in handy when Modano was left wide open... That "Too-many-men" call was BS, and anyone who plays hockey knows that that happens like 50 times a game, and for that to be called it kinda garbage, unless there was something on the play that i didn't notice. In the end, im not sure Rissmiller is costing us points, I just don't think hes helping us get any, which isn't that bad, but there are more productive players we could have, especially for his 1 million of salary which we are tight on any way.

LyNX27 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-21-2008, 03:18 PM
  #3
Fletch
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Brooklyn
Posts: 21,469
vCash: 500
I can't recall the play...

but what was Drury doing while Modano was shooting and where were the defensemen? Just wondering how Rissmiller becomes the guy who should be covering Modano in a situation. Not saying it shouldn't happen, but I'd really like to know the situation a bit better. Sometimes when you're at the game a lot of finer points get missed (and at the same time, you see a lot that's not on TV).

Fletch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-21-2008, 03:18 PM
  #4
AdamGravesNight
Registered User
 
AdamGravesNight's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Vegas/Jersey/Georgia
Country: United States
Posts: 240
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to AdamGravesNight Send a message via Yahoo to AdamGravesNight
3 points lost... We got 1 against Detroit.

AdamGravesNight is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-21-2008, 03:50 PM
  #5
mikesect424
Registered User
 
mikesect424's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Long Beach, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 201
vCash: 500
Rissmiller placed on waivers as per Blueshirt Bulletin. Thank You!

mikesect424 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-21-2008, 03:58 PM
  #6
Levitate
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 21,403
vCash: 500
Not entirely sure why it's Renney's fault that there was a too many men on the ice situation. Voros jumped early and then touched the puck. It was pretty clearly his fault. Despite that, it was still a pretty **** penalty call.

Levitate is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-21-2008, 04:01 PM
  #7
Bluenote13
Believe In Henke
 
Bluenote13's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: BKLYN, NYC
Posts: 23,913
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Levitate View Post
Not entirely sure why it's Renney's fault that there was a too many men on the ice situation. Voros jumped early and then touched the puck. It was pretty clearly his fault. Despite that, it was still a pretty **** penalty call.
It was the worst too many men call i've seen in a long long time. You dont make that call with 5 minutes left in a one goal game, just awful.

Bluenote13 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-21-2008, 04:31 PM
  #8
sattar18
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 5,471
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bluenote13 View Post
It was the worst too many men call i've seen in a long long time. You dont make that call with 5 minutes left in a one goal game, just awful.
a "to many men on the ice" penatly is straight forward...if there are to many players on the ice you should get called..that being said i did not see the play

sattar18 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-21-2008, 04:33 PM
  #9
Bluenote13
Believe In Henke
 
Bluenote13's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: BKLYN, NYC
Posts: 23,913
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by sattar18 View Post
a "to many men on the ice" penatly is straight forward...if there are to many players on the ice you should get called..that being said i did not see the play

Brilliant.

One of our players was just standing at the boards waiting to be let in, he didnt touch the puck, it was just a horrible call.

Bluenote13 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-21-2008, 04:52 PM
  #10
Burlington Bomb 26
Louie Louie Oh oh
 
Burlington Bomb 26's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Green Mountain State
Country: United States
Posts: 16,615
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by sattar18 View Post
a "to many men on the ice" penatly is straight forward...if there are to many players on the ice you should get called..that being said i did not see the play
If you saw the play, you would know why we are complaining so much about it

Burlington Bomb 26 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-21-2008, 05:16 PM
  #11
segmentation fault
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Jersey City
Country: Italy
Posts: 2,131
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Levitate View Post
Not entirely sure why it's Renney's fault that there was a too many men on the ice situation. Voros jumped early and then touched the puck. It was pretty clearly his fault. Despite that, it was still a pretty **** penalty call.
It seemed like Voros was gliding towards it and at the same time facing the guy getting on the bench. I think he figured the guy would get off the ice in time.

segmentation fault is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-21-2008, 05:42 PM
  #12
gravytrain6t
Registered User
 
gravytrain6t's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Long Island
Country: United States
Posts: 2,867
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by segmentation fault View Post
It seemed like Voros was gliding towards it and at the same time facing the guy getting on the bench. I think he figured the guy would get off the ice in time.
Well I would like to see it again also but what Renney is saying was that call never would have been made if the Rangers didn't have such a hard time opening up the door, like it was jammed or something. Then the Rangers player tried to climb over the boards, but at that time it was already too late. Voros touched the puck. But I agree with someone else who commented on this. So many times during a game do I see player skating towards the bench or facing the bench, ready to get off the ice in full awareness that if he should get involved in the play, "a too many men" call would be made. I remember Joe Micheletti going crazy on the mic. saying it shouldn't have been called. So at the start of this thread, I probably should have made it clear that the "too may men on the ice" call was not the fault of Renney. Just a call that was made to get the home team defending champs back in the game. This is making me mad as I type. It's like the Refs just couldnt find anything else to call.
It doesn't end here. Don't forget about the two points that the Rangers picked up in Philly, which couldve been zero or one. A whole different type of penalty but Richards clearly interfered with Valliquette in the crease and not only was the call not made, the Flyers scored.

gravytrain6t is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-21-2008, 06:29 PM
  #13
gravytrain6t
Registered User
 
gravytrain6t's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Long Island
Country: United States
Posts: 2,867
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fletch View Post
but what was Drury doing while Modano was shooting and where were the defensemen? Just wondering how Rissmiller becomes the guy who should be covering Modano in a situation. Not saying it shouldn't happen, but I'd really like to know the situation a bit better. Sometimes when you're at the game a lot of finer points get missed (and at the same time, you see a lot that's not on TV).
If you go on the stars website and click on stats, then click on modanno and watch his goal scoring high lights, the game winner against the Rangers should be the first one to pop up. As the play develops, Rissmiller had two choices. One was to move toward modanno who was plopped right in the slot just waiting and praying for the puck to come on his stick and the other was to fall back and stand in front of Lundqvuist and watch the play happen. He chose the latter. At first, it looks like Rissmiller was about to make the right defensive play but then he just stopped and fell back. I might have agreed with that choice if there was a Star player who needed to be covered but Girardi was already in front of Henrik and tried unsuccessfully to cut off the pass but the only thing Rissmiller had was the best view in the house standing directly to the left of Henrik watching one of the best scorers ever just blast one past a helpless lundqvuist. As for Drury. I can't say he was at fault. Rissmiller was much closer to covering Modanno. As a matter of fact Drury came close himself to breaking up the play.

I mean, this wasn't, nor it will be the worst defensive play in the history of the NHL but I believe the bottom line is. Rissmiller doesn't belong in Rangers blue. His days are already numbered.

gravytrain6t is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-22-2008, 09:23 AM
  #14
Levitate
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 21,403
vCash: 500
I believe the refs can call something like an illegal line change, instead of a too many men on the ice penalty. Then the play stops and the faceoff is in their zone or something. I tend to think that would have been a better call in that circumstance.

But what I'm assuming happened is that Voros jumped early, one of the refs saw it, and had already made up his mind that he was going to call a too many men on the ice penalty if Voros touched the puck. So he basically just watched Voros until he touched the puck, despite Korpikoski stepping off the ice at the same time, and blew his whistle.

Levitate is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-22-2008, 09:54 AM
  #15
SupersonicMonkey*
DROP THE PUCK
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: USA
Country: United States
Posts: 16,230
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bluenote13 View Post
Brilliant.

One of our players was just standing at the boards waiting to be let in, he didnt touch the puck, it was just a horrible call.
Voros touched the puck. Which is when the whistle was blown.

If you have too many men on the ice, it will not be called unless SOMEONE/ANYONE (of that team) on the ice touches it.

It didn't have to be the guy who didn't belong on the ice, it is a bench minor (whole team is responsible). If anyone touches the puck, it instigates the call. Like high sticking (knocking the puck down, not hitting someone in the head), or hand pass.

However, unless there are clearly 6 guys running around the ice involved in the play, too many men is a judgment call that refs use at their own discretion. Refs usually let quick sloppy changes go. It happens 50 times per game. If they want to be a stickler, they make that crap call late in the game.

The call probably would not have been made if it weren't for the fact that the puck was in the neutral zone. If it were in either team's zone, it would've been overlooked.

I disagree with the call, but to be fair to the refs, the puck was in the neutral zone, right in the middle of what was going on, if they didn't make the call they wouldn't have been doing their jobs.


Last edited by SupersonicMonkey*: 10-22-2008 at 10:01 AM.
SupersonicMonkey* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-22-2008, 10:02 AM
  #16
Fletch
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Brooklyn
Posts: 21,469
vCash: 500
gravytrain...

my question really was what was Drury doing on the play. Typically he'd be covering the centerman. I was just wondering what happened in the play where he wouldn't be by his man. And considering you said that Drury almost broke up the play, and that Rissmiller looked like he would make the right defensive play, is it possible Rissmiller thought Drury would get to Modano and didn't want to leave his post as there would be an open guy elsewhere if two players went to the shooter? Again, I saw the play but being there made it difficult to see everything at that time, so I don't know the answers.

EDIT: finally watched it. I actually can't blame Rissmiller. Wasn't Naslund (or somebody, couldn't really tell) right behind Modano? That, and two Rangers got caught deep with one defenseman in front and stuck with no place to go. Rissmiller covered his side and the play developed pretty quickly whereby he had no chance to get to Modano. He seemed to go towards Modano, but his first instinct was to cover his side of the net. Of course, if the Rangers win the battle for the puck (Kalinin and Drury) the shot never happens. Also, he should've gotten the puck out of the zone too, but Boucher kept it in. Anyway, it seemed as a play that you can blame every player on the ice, except perhaps for Girardi who seemed to do the right thing (and perhaps Lundqvist, but he often comes up with that save).


Last edited by Fletch: 10-22-2008 at 10:11 AM.
Fletch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-22-2008, 10:13 AM
  #17
SupersonicMonkey*
DROP THE PUCK
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: USA
Country: United States
Posts: 16,230
vCash: 500
It's not the center's job to cover the other center in the defensive zone.

In the defensive zone it is the center's job to cover the slot, or reinforce in the corners.

The winger's job is to cover the point man, and anyone else as far down low as the circle. Winger should never be in the corner at even strength.

Whose job was it to cover the high slot? Depends. The pass came to Modono from the corner, where Drury was, Naslund's job was to then cover that area. the shot came from Naslund's side.

But to be fair on that play, the defense (Kalinin and Girardi) were extremely lazy on the play. Kalinin just swiped at the puck and Girardi made a half assed attempt in front. There were 4 guys standing around doing nothing on the play. Drury, although ineffective on the play, was where he needed to be. In the corner reinforcing. Everyone else stood around.

If you blame a winger, it is Naslund.

Watch the replay.

SupersonicMonkey* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-22-2008, 10:20 AM
  #18
Fletch
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Brooklyn
Posts: 21,469
vCash: 500
I did blame Naslund (after watching the video), but didn't see Naslund (meaning, couldn't tell his number). I hadn't seen the play, so I really didn't know if Drury was coming back, but now realize he was going deep to help the defenseman, which is what he should've been doing, and I couldn't recall how it was live, so now I've just watched it.

Considering where he (Modano) was, you wouldn't expect the left winger to be covering him. Riss was pretty much where he should've been - down a bit low to cover the net if need be or get to the point if need be. He should've gotten the puck out in the first place though, and fault him for letting the defenseman keep the puck in the zone. I also think Riss thought Girardi was going to go out to Modano and was looking to cover the front of the net, which is fine. Kalinin also paused prior to going to the puck (isn't that Girardi's side? Although he was tied up with Modano - good play by Modano to get open), and that hesitation led to the Stars retrieving and controlling the puck along the boards. Girardi didn't know what to do, but communicated pretty well, but it was too late.

Fletch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-22-2008, 11:06 AM
  #19
gravytrain6t
Registered User
 
gravytrain6t's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Long Island
Country: United States
Posts: 2,867
vCash: 500
[QUOTE=Fletch;15966299]my question really was what was Drury doing on the play. Typically he'd be covering the centerman. I was just wondering what happened in the play where he wouldn't be by his man. And considering you said that Drury almost broke up the play, and that Rissmiller looked like he would make the right defensive play, is it possible Rissmiller thought Drury would get to Modano and didn't want to leave his post as there would be an open guy elsewhere if two players went to the shooter? Again, I saw the play but being there made it difficult to see everything at that time, so I don't know the answers.

EDIT: finally watched it. I actually can't blame Rissmiller. Wasn't Naslund (or somebody, couldn't really tell) right behind Modano? That, and two Rangers got caught deep with one defenseman in front and stuck with no place to go. Rissmiller covered his side and the play developed pretty quickly whereby he had no chance to get to Modano. He seemed to go towards Modano, but his first instinct was to cover his side of the net. Of course, if the Rangers win the battle for the puck (Kalinin and Drury) the shot never happens. Also, he should've gotten the puck out of the zone too, but Boucher kept it in. Anyway, it seemed as a play that you can blame every player on the ice, except perhaps for Girardi who seemed to do the right thing (and perhaps Lundqvist, but he often comes up with that save).[/QU
And upon further review lol. I agree. I think you could've blamed both Naslund and Rissmiller for not going after Modanno. It looked like Rissmiller was initially heading toward Modanno but then maybe had seen Naslund was there so he backed off and stayed by the net. Naslund may have saw Rissmiller coming at first and figured Modanno was covered. Not to mention it really was a good pass by the Star player who got the assist. I do agree though. Naslund was caught day dreaming and took it for granted that Rissmiller would hustle over there to cover Modanno. Well it's all over. Both the game and Rissmiller's days as a NY Ranger are thankfully short lived.

gravytrain6t is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-22-2008, 11:20 AM
  #20
frozenH20
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 63
vCash: 500
In fairness, Rissmiller was a solution to problem that didn’t exist and didn’t improve upon what we had on tap. He played on the 1st line against Dallas, as a token gesture. Yeah, he made a mental mistake, bad pass, etc. (which he has a history of), but he wasn’t the reason why we lost against Dallas.

Reflecting back at the losses. I think Buffalo beat us by exposing our ineffectiveness against their trap. Against Detroit, we let the fear of playing against the champs paralyze us for the two quick goals. The lame bench penalty turned the tide in favor of Detroit. Overall, keeping up with Detroit and walking a way with a point was impressive.

Dallas was the ugliest game we’ve had thus far. We missed tons of scoring chances in the 1st period from our own ineptness to hit the net. From the 2nd period on, fatigue from too many games in too short a time span set in. No one had any gas left, desire to win or even play. I think Prucha, Korpo and Frische were well rested and should have been individually. Or as a line, perhaps giving Naslund and Drury who have been under performing a rest.

Thus far, we’ve excelled playing up tempo, but not so good at slow and methodical. We’ve become the polar opposite of last year.

frozenH20 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-22-2008, 11:30 AM
  #21
Fletch
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Brooklyn
Posts: 21,469
vCash: 500
Naslund and Drury had a rest - take a look at their ice time. If Drury's tired, perhaps Renney should've looked at the schedule and remembered last season when Drury tired out early from so much work.

I'm not sure why Prucha wasn't in over Rissmiller, aside from giving him one last look for teams that may be looking to pick up a guy on waivers, forgetting that he has a contract that's likely unmovable.

You hate to lose those kinds of games at home. But with the cushion they created with the start out of the gate, they can afford to lose a game here and there they were supposed to win. But soon, they won't have that luxury as everything gets more normalized and good teams start playing better. Heck, people are happy the Rangers kept up with the champs (who were without Zetterberg, a key to them being called champs), but one needs to remember that same team lost on home ice, in the opener, to Toronto.

Fletch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-22-2008, 11:56 AM
  #22
gravytrain6t
Registered User
 
gravytrain6t's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Long Island
Country: United States
Posts: 2,867
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fletch View Post
Naslund and Drury had a rest - take a look at their ice time. If Drury's tired, perhaps Renney should've looked at the schedule and remembered last season when Drury tired out early from so much work.

I'm not sure why Prucha wasn't in over Rissmiller, aside from giving him one last look for teams that may be looking to pick up a guy on waivers, forgetting that he has a contract that's likely unmovable.

You hate to lose those kinds of games at home. But with the cushion they created with the start out of the gate, they can afford to lose a game here and there they were supposed to win. But soon, they won't have that luxury as everything gets more normalized and good teams start playing better. Heck, people are happy the Rangers kept up with the champs (who were without Zetterberg, a key to them being called champs), but one needs to remember that same team lost on home ice, in the opener, to Toronto.
When I watch a Rangers game I always have the feeling nothing is going to be easy. I especially had that feeling against Detroit even after the Rangers took the lead. Getting that "too many men on the ice call" at that point of the game, against the best team in the league, while playing on their home ice makes the home ice loss to the struggling Stars that much more unbearable. I think the Rangers coaches and players should be embarrassed after taking that type of penalty late in the game with a 1 goal lead against the Wings. However you want to look at it, that was a "clumsy," "dopey," lackadaisical penalty and it cost us 2 points. And I don't care if we were undefeated at that time. After watching Lunqvuist get as angry as I've ever seen him like he did after the game, tells me he wasn't so satisfied with getting the one point either.
As far as the Dallas game goes. Yes Rissmiller stinks and I'm glad he's gone but the biggest reason why this team lost is because they couldn't score goals. No rebound opportunities, guys missing the net, not attacking the net. Just a badly prepared game and conversely the team looked like garbage.

gravytrain6t is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-22-2008, 12:01 PM
  #23
nyr2k2
Can't Beat Him
 
nyr2k2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Washington, DC
Country: United States
Posts: 24,382
vCash: 50
Awards:
Quote:
Originally Posted by gravytrain6t View Post
When I watch a Rangers game I always have the feeling nothing is going to be easy. I especially had that feeling against Detroit even after the Rangers took the lead. Getting that "too many men on the ice call" at that point of the game, against the best team in the league, while playing on their home ice makes the home ice loss to the struggling Stars that much more unbearable. I think the Rangers coaches and players should be embarrassed after taking that type of penalty late in the game with a 1 goal lead against the Wings. However you want to look at it, that was a "clumsy," "dopey," lackadaisical penalty and it cost us 2 points. And I don't care if we were undefeated at that time. After watching Lunqvuist get as angry as I've ever seen him like he did after the game, tells me he wasn't so satisfied with getting the one point either.
As far as the Dallas game goes. Yes Rissmiller stinks and I'm glad he's gone but the biggest reason why this team lost is because they couldn't score goals. No rebound opportunities, guys missing the net, not attacking the net. Just a badly prepared and conversely the team looked like garbage.
That's true for all my teams... Mets, Jets, Rangers... Nothing ever comes easy, it's always an exciting/heartbreaking finish. Can't put teams away, and can't hold on once we think we have put them away.

__________________

It's just pain.
nyr2k2 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
10-22-2008, 12:17 PM
  #24
Fletch
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Brooklyn
Posts: 21,469
vCash: 500
I have to be honest...

when you watch the Rangers and they're "on" their game, they look invincible. When they lose those games in which they're skating very well and can't score a goal, it's very frustrating. But the problem with many Rangers teams is they have difficulty playing 60 minutes of hockey. And part of it is the defensive style whereby they try to sit on one and two goal leads instead of attacking and extending that lead. But that's Renney's comfort zone and it seems as though it works more than it hasn't worked. But on a positive note, any time this team is down one or two goals going into the third, I still feel like the game isn't over, even with ten minutes left in the game.

Fletch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-22-2008, 12:41 PM
  #25
Garfinkel1
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: CT
Posts: 3,448
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by gravytrain6t View Post
Well I would like to see it again also but what Renney is saying was that call never would have been made if the Rangers didn't have such a hard time opening up the door, like it was jammed or something. Then the Rangers player tried to climb over the boards, but at that time it was already too late. Voros touched the puck. But I agree with someone else who commented on this. So many times during a game do I see player skating towards the bench or facing the bench, ready to get off the ice in full awareness that if he should get involved in the play, "a too many men" call would be made. I remember Joe Micheletti going crazy on the mic. saying it shouldn't have been called. So at the start of this thread, I probably should have made it clear that the "too may men on the ice" call was not the fault of Renney. Just a call that was made to get the home team defending champs back in the game. This is making me mad as I type. It's like the Refs just couldnt find anything else to call.
It doesn't end here. Don't forget about the two points that the Rangers picked up in Philly, which couldve been zero or one. A whole different type of penalty but Richards clearly interfered with Valliquette in the crease and not only was the call not made, the Flyers scored.
I think we need to trade for a fast, offensively mind player that excels at opening bench doors.

Garfinkel1 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 11:53 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. ©2015 All Rights Reserved.