HFBoards

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

#24: Flames @ Flyers - Friday, Nov. 26, 2010 - 1:00 PM (ET)

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
11-26-2010, 06:13 PM
  #651
CharlieGirl
Go Rangers Go
 
CharlieGirl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Kitchener, ON
Country: Canada
Posts: 30,086
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jules801 View Post
They'll never not back up a ref to the public. I'd like to see Campbell's emails though. LOL.

I want to write to him -- "What would your reaction to that call be if it was made on YOUR son?"
LOL -- now that's an email I'd love to see.

CharlieGirl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-26-2010, 06:51 PM
  #652
drownedsailors
Registered User
 
drownedsailors's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Earth
Country: United States
Posts: 1,949
vCash: 500
I love my Flyers, but this game wouldn't have even went to OT, if they all played Flyer hockey...they came into this game WAY to cocky not even thinking about how hungry and desperate the Flames would be for points...

I mean did you guys actually see the standings in the Western Conference? Christ...it changes multiple times a day...

drownedsailors is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-26-2010, 08:18 PM
  #653
Flyerfan4life
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Richmond BC, Canada
Country: England
Posts: 14,742
vCash: 500
loved watching Z yet again..

but suffering throu the refs made this a game that wasnt enjoyable, but instead a exercise in frustration..

Flyerfan4life is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
11-26-2010, 08:23 PM
  #654
Giroux tha Damaja
Registered User
 
Giroux tha Damaja's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Mount Holly, NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 9,234
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Giroux tha Damaja
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cmoneyflyguy View Post
Seriously, can anyone defending the call explain why the whistle wasn't blown right away? The Flyers had possession the ENTIRE time.

Pronger was moving solely to obstruct the view of the goalie, and in no way was it plausible that how he moved his hand was more to direct traffic than block Kipper's sight. Just look at the manner it's moved in. Now, you're allowed to screen the goalie as a result of your positioning if that position is taken in the interest of making a hockey play, but that's not what happened.

That having been said, what Pronger did is close enough to normal and far enough from Avery's ******** that had we not scored we probably would have gotten away with out the unsportsmanlike. Which is, IMO good officiating. You let guys walk the line and sometimes tip toe over, and if there's no harm there's no foul. That said once we scored he was forced to call the unsportsmanlike, because that is the penalty that should result if the goal is waived off for Pronger's tactic there (which is should have been).

IMO the delay is explainable via the delay of the human brain processing info or the intent to give Pronger the benefit of the doubt a little bit. Either way it was an acceptable call.

Giroux tha Damaja is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-26-2010, 08:52 PM
  #655
MsWoof
Registered User
 
MsWoof's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 13,498
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Giroux tha Damaja View Post
Pronger was moving solely to obstruct the view of the goalie, and in no way was it plausible that how he moved his hand was more to direct traffic than block Kipper's sight. Just look at the manner it's moved in. Now, you're allowed to screen the goalie as a result of your positioning if that position is taken in the interest of making a hockey play, but that's not what happened.

That having been said, what Pronger did is close enough to normal and far enough from Avery's ******** that had we not scored we probably would have gotten away with out the unsportsmanlike. Which is, IMO good officiating. You let guys walk the line and sometimes tip toe over, and if there's no harm there's no foul. That said once we scored he was forced to call the unsportsmanlike, because that is the penalty that should result if the goal is waived off for Pronger's tactic there (which is should have been).

IMO the delay is explainable via the delay of the human brain processing info or the intent to give Pronger the benefit of the doubt a little bit. Either way it was an acceptable call.
The ref's arm should have gone up as soon as Pronger's hand went up to Kipper's face. I think the whole "we want our calls to be right even if they're slow" comment from Gregson is crap, I don't think Pronger was going to be penalized if a goal hadn't been scored. Pronger screwed up badly by doing what he did, and on a 4 on 3 to boot. The loss of a point falls squarely on his shoulders because he could have been just as effective standing in front of the goalie but no, he had to do something idiotic. The ref should have put his arm up immediately on Pronger and at the same time should have penalized Kipper for the slash. Three screw ups all within about 5 seconds.

MsWoof is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-26-2010, 09:01 PM
  #656
chimrichalds18
the key
 
chimrichalds18's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: philadelphia
Country: United States
Posts: 2,775
vCash: 500
Can someone please tell Lavy that the Richards-Carter-Briere 5-on-3 line is not a good idea and needs to be changed? Carter is probably the 6th forward you want out there at this point.

chimrichalds18 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-26-2010, 09:18 PM
  #657
MiamiScreamingEagles
Global Moderator
A Fistful of Dollars
 
MiamiScreamingEagles's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 42,222
vCash: 2226
http://www.delcotimes.com/articles/2...mode=fullstory

Quote:
Youthful referee Ghislain Hebert, who was said to have made all nine minor penalties that were whistled in the game, saw that as an infraction of the so-called "Sean Avery Rule," which two years ago was added to the oft-ignored (and why not?) NHL rule book.

And just because Mike Richards was putting a shot in the net as Hebert was slowly in the process of tooting his metal horn at Pronger ... so what?

"Good call," Kiprusoff said later. "I yelled and he saw it. It came a little late, but I don't mind. It was the right call. And it was good for us."

Sure was, for the Richards goal was disallowed, Pronger went to the penalty box for "unsportsmanlike conduct," (with what looked like a few unprintable heckles along the way) and Kiprusoff and the Flames were allowed to escape into a shootout where third Flame Rene Bourque's shot through goalie Sergei Bobrovsky proved the difference.

As for differences of opinion on the Pronger penalty, they were plentiful.

"I saw Prongs calling for the puck. I knew he wanted it," Richards said. "As I was walking up he made a motion like he was by himself, which he was. I just tried to float it in there and I think he missed it and it went in. He was calling for the puck, I thought. We work on that in practice. If he's open, he calls for it and we just try to lob it in there for him."

“It's the right call," Kiprusoff said of a rule that was fashioned shortly after then-Rangers agitator Avery mugged in Marty Brodeur's face while the Devils goalie was trying to see the playoff action that April day in 2008.

While blocking a goalie's view wasn't exactly good sportsmanship then, it wasn't illegal according to the world's hole-liest major sports rule book. So league ruling body Colin Campbell and Co. took all of one day to institute a new rule stipulating that "when an offensive player positions himself facing the opposition goaltender and engages in actions such as waving his arms or stick in front of the goaltender's face, for the purpose of improperly interfering with and/or distracting the goaltender as opposed to positioning himself to try to make a play..."

It's illegal now, baby.

MiamiScreamingEagles is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
11-26-2010, 09:27 PM
  #658
Flyerfan4life
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Richmond BC, Canada
Country: England
Posts: 14,742
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MiamiScreamingEagles View Post
yea but prongs isn't facing the goalie, how is he to know if his glove is blocking the goalies view or not, it's not his fault that he is tall, and the goalie is positioned the way he is

I think the call was *********, and the timing of the whistle makes it that much worse....

perhaps they should change the rule so the players in front of the net "must be only this tall" clause

Flyerfan4life is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
11-26-2010, 10:04 PM
  #659
MiamiScreamingEagles
Global Moderator
A Fistful of Dollars
 
MiamiScreamingEagles's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 42,222
vCash: 2226
Quote:
Originally Posted by Flyerfan4life View Post
yea but prongs isn't facing the goalie, how is he to know if his glove is blocking the goalies view or not, it's not his fault that he is tall, and the goalie is positioned the way he is

I think the call was *********, and the timing of the whistle makes it that much worse....

perhaps they should change the rule so the players in front of the net "must be only this tall" clause
A fair amount of interpretation is not uncommon. But what strikes me is the fact that at least two outlets specifically mentioned that one referee called all nine minor penalties. There's probably internal measures in place where the Director of Officials (Terry Gregson) would eventually be in discussion with one or both on-ice officials, too. I imagine that a ref calling all nine penalties in a game is a rarity. Also, too, it's likely a play such as this is mentioned in competition committee meetings and if needed a rule can be analyzed and tweaked. That said, the account below mentions a memo issued to team personnel regarding the subject at hand so without that knowledge we'll be going in circles.

http://www.cbc.ca/sports/blogs/scott...er-flyers.html

Quote:
After the incident, in April 2008, the league issued an interpretation to rule 75, which covers unsportsmanlike conduct, allowing for a penalty when a player stands in front of a goaltender and either waves his arms, or stick, in the goalie's face for what they deemed is "improperly interfering with and/or distracting the goaltender as opposed to positioning himself to try to make a play."

The Avery act that prompted the interpretation was an utterly absurd scene, of course. This one was nothing close.

Pronger never faced the goaltender, he only briefly stuck out his glove, but it still apparently does fall under the spirit of the rule and teams were given a memo defining instances involving unsportsmanlike conduct and interfering with goaltenders.

Few people thought they would ever see the "Avery Rule" called again, at least not unless it involved Avery, and how it is called will undoubtedly infuriate players, coaches and fans.

MiamiScreamingEagles is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
11-26-2010, 10:09 PM
  #660
ilovetheflyers8
Registered User
 
ilovetheflyers8's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: D.C.
Country: French Guiana Independentist
Posts: 4,892
vCash: 500
I went to my first game in Philadelphia today, the ending sucked, but other than that it was pretty fun. Also those chickie and pete's fries are really good.

edit: Finally seeing the Spectrum was pretty cool too, it's still standing it just has a large hole in it in one place.


Last edited by ilovetheflyers8: 11-26-2010 at 11:31 PM.
ilovetheflyers8 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-26-2010, 10:53 PM
  #661
Mgkibbles
Registered User
 
Mgkibbles's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Gilbertsville, Pa
Posts: 2,087
vCash: 500
Calls shouldn't be made off the reaction of a goalie after surrendering a goal - which is exactly what happened this afternoon. It's hard to tell what Pronger's intentions were, at first I thought he was communicating with Richards, but after watching the play a few more times it appears he was trying to distract Kipper, however, he wasn't face guarding Kipper the way Avery had Brodeur in 2008 so I think it was a poor call, especially in that situation. Overtime is no place for indecisive calls.


Last edited by Mgkibbles: 11-26-2010 at 10:58 PM.
Mgkibbles is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-26-2010, 11:20 PM
  #662
Larry44
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 5,636
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CharlieGirl View Post
Surprise, surprise. According to TSN, the league has stated that they feel the ref did the right thing. Just one more example of how bush league the NHL really is.
Police are never guilty of brutality and refs never make a mistake. Who knew?

I liked that virtually every commentator said the Flyers got hosed.

Larry44 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-27-2010, 01:09 AM
  #663
Terence Peterman
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Country: United States
Posts: 5,296
vCash: 500
Regardless if you want to call that a penalty or a good call, the ref's arm needs to go up at some point there. It never leaves his side. He's just asking for controversy by not putting it up, and taking what little credibility a play like that could have and marking it as irrelevant.

Terence Peterman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-27-2010, 02:00 AM
  #664
ugiswrong
Registered User
 
ugiswrong's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: deutschland
Country: United States
Posts: 802
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Giroux tha Damaja View Post
Pronger was moving solely to obstruct the view of the goalie, and in no way was it plausible that how he moved his hand was more to direct traffic than block Kipper's sight. Just look at the manner it's moved in. Now, you're allowed to screen the goalie as a result of your positioning if that position is taken in the interest of making a hockey play, but that's not what happened.

That having been said, what Pronger did is close enough to normal and far enough from Avery's ******** that had we not scored we probably would have gotten away with out the unsportsmanlike. Which is, IMO good officiating. You let guys walk the line and sometimes tip toe over, and if there's no harm there's no foul. That said once we scored he was forced to call the unsportsmanlike, because that is the penalty that should result if the goal is waived off for Pronger's tactic there (which it should have been).

IMO the delay is explainable via the delay of the human brain processing info or the intent to give Pronger the benefit of the doubt a little bit. Either way it was an acceptable call.
Agree 100% with this analysis. The allowing of walking the line is even looser in OT than in the first 60 minutes.

I think that no penalty would have been called had no goal been scored. That's why you don't see an arm going up. Perhaps if that had happened during regulation and not OT, the arm would have been up. It's all conjecture though.

Pronger is not an idiot. He knows exactly how to do something fishy.

Pronger needs to skate the two feet to his side there and screen with his massive torso, i.e. how hockey ought to be played, none of this bush league crap.

If Shelley had been out there screening, he probably wouldn't have done that...

ugiswrong is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-27-2010, 03:14 AM
  #665
Spongolium*
Potato Magician
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Bridgend,UK
Country: Wales
Posts: 8,653
vCash: 500
For me personally, if the call was to be a right one, but had to be called immediatly. I could of lived with the fact that pronger was called a second after it happened, but to wait until the puck was in the net before calling him for it, a good 5 seconds after he did it, and when kipper had a full line of sight to the puck. Sometimes the refs really need to understand just what they are doing. I would of liked the ref to come out and explain his side.

Spongolium* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-27-2010, 03:57 AM
  #666
Hockey Team
Hunger Force
 
Hockey Team's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: New York, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 4,485
vCash: 500
I'm a rangers fan and I hate the flyers.

I think it's hilarious you guys got screwed out of the point. Even with how biased I am, that call was crap. I mean, that was basically the ref saying "oh, the flyers won? Well I bet on the other team so no goal!!"

It is probably the single worst call I have ever seen. There are tons of allowed goals that should have been called goaltender interference and tons of quick whistles and bs wave offs but all those are in a grey area. This was a late call after the fact to take a goal away when a bogus rule that shouldn't even exist was called when it wasn't even violated!

Hockey Team is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-27-2010, 04:43 AM
  #667
Beef Invictus
Global Moderator
FAT SLOB
 
Beef Invictus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Centreville
Country: Lord Howe Island
Posts: 45,834
vCash: 500
I had to wait for the text message to find out the result of this game...i was disappointed.

after reading the last couple pages here, i'm just ****ing pissed.

Beef Invictus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-27-2010, 06:11 AM
  #668
nevermore
Cap space since 2005
 
nevermore's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Country: Austria
Posts: 11,899
vCash: 500
The good: I slept well.
The bad: I'm way more pissed about the Pronger call than last night.

nevermore is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-27-2010, 06:46 AM
  #669
Flyotes
JVR is Pigeon Caw!
 
Flyotes's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 5,708
vCash: 500
Sorry, internet finally woke up.

I was at this game. The BOOing was incredible for the remainder of the game.

That was the loudest extended booing I'd ever heard in any place.

YES! WE WIN!! YEES!!!... Wait.... what...

WHAT

WHAT!!!!!!!!!!

BOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO (7 minutes).

Flyotes is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-27-2010, 08:20 AM
  #670
StandingCow
Registered User
 
StandingCow's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Country: United States
Posts: 3,682
vCash: 500
Yea, I don't think a lot of the people on the main forum get, that we aren't pissed the call was made... we are pissed at when they made it, another call by result.

Had they called it right away, sure I woulda been pissed, but that woulda been the right thing to do. You don't wait for the result of a penalty to make a call, especially when it is well after.

StandingCow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-27-2010, 08:27 AM
  #671
DrinkFightFlyers
Grave Before Shave
 
DrinkFightFlyers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 13,502
vCash: 50
Send a message via AIM to DrinkFightFlyers
Did anyone watch the highlights on SC this morning? I haven't seen them yet, but I always like to see ESPN's take on big or controversial events in the NHL because they usually don't even mention them or just casually gloss over them. If there were a bad call on LeBron James that cost the Heat a win, there would be 40 minutes of the show dedicated to how bad a call it was and there would be analysts from all over the country discussing what happened. Ugh. I hate ESPN.

DrinkFightFlyers is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-27-2010, 08:39 AM
  #672
CharlieGirl
Go Rangers Go
 
CharlieGirl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Kitchener, ON
Country: Canada
Posts: 30,086
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by nevermore View Post
The good: I slept well.
The bad: I'm way more pissed about the Pronger call than last night.
I'm hoping the Flyers did the same, and they take it out on the Devils today.

CharlieGirl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-27-2010, 08:54 AM
  #673
Pantokrator
Who's the clown?
 
Pantokrator's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Semmes, Alabama
Country: Guatemala
Posts: 4,462
vCash: 500
So the rule states that if the player is FACING the goalie it is a penalty - was Pronger facing the goalie? Because if not, then by the latter of the law, it is not a penalty, right?

Pantokrator is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-27-2010, 09:01 AM
  #674
Superman33
Registered User
 
Superman33's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Bucks County.
Country: United States
Posts: 1,860
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Superman33
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrinkFightFlyers View Post
Did anyone watch the highlights on SC this morning? I haven't seen them yet, but I always like to see ESPN's take on big or controversial events in the NHL because they usually don't even mention them or just casually gloss over them. If there were a bad call on LeBron James that cost the Heat a win, there would be 40 minutes of the show dedicated to how bad a call it was and there would be analysts from all over the country discussing what happened. Ugh. I hate ESPN.
I haven't even turned it on today because I guarantee they aren't going to show it at all. I was talking to my dad about it yesterday and he said, "I'll have to watch sportscenter to catch the highlights so..." and I cut him off. I went on a tirade about how there is no way they will show it. They are probably going to have 45 minutes of the show for Auburn coming back against Alabama and Boise State losing in overtime. The rest of the show will be a mix of today's college football games and people over 6'6 dunking a ball into a rim they barely have to jump for.

Superman33 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-27-2010, 10:13 AM
  #675
GKJ
Global Moderator
Entertainment
 
GKJ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Do not trade plz
Country: United States
Posts: 114,256
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pantokrator View Post
So the rule states that if the player is FACING the goalie it is a penalty - was Pronger facing the goalie? Because if not, then by the latter of the law, it is not a penalty, right?
It's not a rule. It's not in the rulebook. It's only a directive to be interpreted by the referee as he deems appropriate as is any other unsportsmanlike penalty.


And why are people going to ESPN for hockey? That's like going to Fox News for comedy.

__________________
Philadelphia's Real Alternative
(ynotradio.net)

Stop Feeding the Rumor-Monger

"I wonder if Norstrom has Forsberg's spleen mounted on his wall." - KINGS17

My 50 Favorite Albums of 2014 (sorry it's late)
GKJ 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 09:26 PM.

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.