haha, I wish. whoever swore immediately apologized on also on air.you the audio guy? nice!
just a little shit, never hurt no one. I'm amazed it doesn't happen more often, -y'all are pros
haha, I wish. whoever swore immediately apologized on also on air.you the audio guy? nice!
just a little shit, never hurt no one. I'm amazed it doesn't happen more often, -y'all are pros
He had a ton of chances, just no finish.DeBrusk led the forwards in ice time. Huh.
I didn't say I wouldn't appreciate or take one. Just didn't want them waiting around for the perfect one.the perfection ones are pretty nice though
of course he ignores if he wins the challenge there's no pp so there's no shorty so ... it's 1-1 instead of 2-2. Wheee.Rod is not happy about the Coyle goal. Taking a page out of the Craig Berube playbook
Yep. He was basically asking the officials to tell him what to challenge and he is mad they didn’t and he may have chosen wrong (who knows how it goes if they challenge for GI).. He says he was never given a call on the ice. But he was- the call on the ice was a goal. They ruled it a goal so there was no GI or hand pass called on the ice. It’s up to the coaches to decide what infraction to challenge on.of course he ignores if he wins the challenge there's no pp so there's no shorty so ... it's 1-1 instead of 2-2. Wheee.
Is the release slow or is he still just a little unsure of taking the shot? 1Ts, sure. But most of his shots are snap/wrist, so shouldnt be much of an issue.Only problem with Kase is he seems to have a slower release and gets his shot blocked a lot, but this could be a Canes being good at shot blocking thing. Hope they keep building.
That's what I told my friend in NC. Brindamour was whining about the ref "not giving him the call." But there was no "call," except "goal." The ref isn't obligated to give the coach a menue of all the possible ways they might have fucked up along the way. "Why do YOU think it shouldn't be a goal, Rod" is the question.Yep. He was basically asking the officials to tell him what to challenge and he is mad they didn’t and he may have chosen wrong (who knows how it goes if they challenge for GI).. He says he was never given a call on the ice. But he was- the call on the ice was a goal. They ruled it a goal so there was no GI or hand pass called on the ice. It’s up to the coaches to decide what infraction to challenge on.
View: https://twitter.com/scoutingtherefs/status/1293654239554744321?s=21
I’d have time for his argument if he said the whole sequence of a goal should be reviewable. All sorts of problems with that stance, but understandable. He made a bad choice and is upset the refs didn’t tell him what to do. He was never going to win a hand pass challenge because Mrazek played the puck. He may have won a GI challenge.That's what I told my friend in NC. Brindamour was whining about the ref "not giving him the call." But there was no "call," except "goal." The ref isn't obligated to give the coach a menue of all the possible ways they might have fucked up along the way. "Why do YOU think it shouldn't be a goal, Rod" is the question.
This is correct. The ref literally said in the review announcement that Mrazek had possession which negated the hand pass. It should have been blown dead and have been no goal, and if that had happened against the Bruins I’d be furious.I still think they may have won a challenge that the puck should have been "frozen" when Mrazek's glove was over it. The motion to "flick" the puck towards Coyle was heavily encouraged by Bjork making an as-the-save-happens swipe at the puck that hit Mrazek's glove pretty clean.
View: https://youtu.be/byZ7c9rxkeE?t=123
Use comma and period to go frame by frame if its hard to see.
I have a vague memory of that happening in the NFL, playoffs, I think. Where the coach tried to challenge something unreviewable and go t apnealty or lost a timeout or something. Then they had to change the rule. Or something.I’d have time for his argument if he said the whole sequence of a goal should be reviewable. All sorts of problems with that stance, but understandable. He made a bad choice and is upset the refs didn’t tell him what to do. He was never going to win a hand pass challenge because Mrazek played the puck. He may have won a GI challenge.
I don't think a missed stoppage due to goalie covering the puck is reviewable, based on this:The ref announced it as "missed stoppage of the puck" though, which is what made me think of the freeze under the glove in the first place. I think this literally might have been a coaching fuckup where he asked for a review for "any missed stoppage" and should have asked for a review for a "missed stoppage because the goalie covered the puck"
The goalie "freezing" the puck would seem to be a "discretionary stoppage."This change will allow Challenges of plays that may involve pucks that hit the spectator netting, pucks that are high-sticked to a teammate in the offensive zone, pucks that have gone out of play but are subsequently touched in the offensive zone and hand passes that precede without a play stoppage and ultimately conclude in the scoring of a goal. Plays that entail "discretionary stoppages" (e.g. penalty calls) will not be subject to a Coach's Challenge.
This is my question as well.Is a frozen puck challengeable though or is that a (dreaded NFL term) judgement call?
it doesn't matter.I honestly don't know the rule, it looked like when he put his glove down he also covered Bjork's stick. IF he covered puck and Bjork's stick does that matter? Aka he cannot freeze it since the players stick is also there? Or it doesn't matter because Mrazek has the puck under the glove?
Frankly to me they're the same. Possession = control.Did he say possession or control? I’m thinking thier out is saying he had possession of it, thus negating the hand pass, but never fully froze (or controlled) it.
‘I may be making things up.
Kase was a revelation for me too, we didn't see any of that post trade deadline when he was recovering from injury. Krejci's line may be very impactful for this run. Ritchie should sit for Kuhlman on Coyle's line at this point. He doesn't complement Coyle and Bjork or anyone for that matter at this point.Kase looked like a Krejci clone out there today in terms of generating space and time for himself. The two also seemed to have some ridiculous chemistry in the offensive zone, which hopefully they can build on. If that's for real, then there's something there that is very, very exciting for this run.
I think the puck covered falls under the goalie interference umbrella.
If that’s goalie interference than why does anyone poke at the puck under the goalie? It’ll always be goalie interference so you can’t gain anything by doing it.Yep, if he challenges for goalie interference he wins the challenge.
But the refs don't owe him shit. It's a good goal. He's gotta pick what he's challenging and he doesn't seem to understand that.
Except when they screw up and don't call it and it leads to a goal. Today is literally why they do it haha.If that’s goalie interference than why does anyone poke at the puck under the goalie? It’ll always be goalie interference so you can’t gain anything by doing it.
As someone who has never gotten that call in his favor in his life, I have little sympathy for Mrazek and the Canes.Except when they screw up and don't call it and it leads to a goal. Today is literally why they do it haha.
And it's not a penalty if they call it, just a disallowed goal. No reason not to try.