10/10 Montreal Sucks
- Thread starter PedroSpecialK
- Start date
So a high stick with Coyle not in the same zip code, a trip where McAvoy played all puck, and whatever the Hell that last call was. All those stern shrugs from Monty are really paying dividends.
The McAvoy trip I can see as skate on skate. You can hit the puck with your stick and still trip someone with your foot.
I feel bad for anyone who has to listen to sports talk radio tomorrow, despite Sway playing great and having almost no chance on any of the goals people are going to point at the 4 scores and trash him would be my guess
“Mike, did you watch the fucking game?” Should be the response if he blames Swayman for any of those.
I'm amazed how many people who post on these forums still do, a lot "blame" it on their commute
63.2 Minor Penalty - A minor penalty for delay of game shall be imposed:
(ii) A minor penalty for delay of game shall be imposed on any player who deliberately shoots or bats (using his hand or his stick) the puck outside the playing area (from anywhere on the ice surface) during the play or after a stoppage of play.
Reminiscent of the Tom Brady intentional grounding for throwing a ball way over the head of his guy in the end zone against Seattle. You will maybe see it called once in your lifetime.
(ii) A minor penalty for delay of game shall be imposed on any player who deliberately shoots or bats (using his hand or his stick) the puck outside the playing area (from anywhere on the ice surface) during the play or after a stoppage of play.
Reminiscent of the Tom Brady intentional grounding for throwing a ball way over the head of his guy in the end zone against Seattle. You will maybe see it called once in your lifetime.
Should he though? You'll never see this called again, just like you've never seen a penalty called for a puck fired into a bench, despite the rule saying it's a penalty.
The Bruins prime objective there is to kill the clock, not stop it. Head scratcher to impute the opposite motive in order to call DoG in that situation.
Just like you will never see a QB (other than the Tom Brady one I mentioned) for airballing a ball into the stands even though by definition of intentional grounding rules sideline and back of endzone throwaways that have no chance of ever being caught should all be called intentional grounding...
SECTION 2 INTENTIONAL GROUNDING ARTICLE 1. DEFINITION. It is a foul for intentional grounding if a passer, facing an imminent loss of yardage because of pressure from the defense, throws a forward pass without a realistic chance of completion. A realistic chance of completion is defined as a pass that is thrown in the direction of and lands in the vicinity of an originally eligible offensive receiver.
There is no exception written into the rules for sideline or end zone throws, but you will never ever see it called (except Brady at Seattle)
unless the league has made this a point of emphasis, you are probably right. But they DiD call it and I’ve never seen it before, so they had their reasons? Is there a pool reporter who gets to ask the refs questions after the game?
Is motive considered by the refs? And if so, why wasn’t the late cross check behind the B’s net called? Among other questionable non calls.
The motive underneath the defensive zone puck over glass call assumes the DMan is trying to avoid pressure that would result in a turnover near his own net. So, in the offensive zone, what’s the essence of the accusation there? Getting a line change that will be followed by an O-Zone faceoff? That’s about all I can think of…
I agree with the D Zone rule. There certainly was no such motive last night, but they didn’t call it just because it was the Bs against Montreal, did they?
No, I think the suspicion here is that it would likely not have been called on a player wearing a different number on their jersey.
It was calling a penalty for the sake of calling a penalty. There was no advantage to be gained by flipping the puck out. They're up by 2 with less than 4 minutes to play so they want to run the clock, not stop it. The line change argument doesn't make sense because he's in or about to gain the offensive end so the other 4 guys can change, he doesn't need to heave it out.
It was a dumb call and if someone other than 63 did it, I doubt calling a penalty even crosses the officials mind. But 63 did it, so something nefarious must be afoot.
A lot of it is his own doing but 63 plays under a different set of rules than the rest of the team/league.
It was a dumb call and if someone other than 63 did it, I doubt calling a penalty even crosses the officials mind. But 63 did it, so something nefarious must be afoot.
A lot of it is his own doing but 63 plays under a different set of rules than the rest of the team/league.
I'd like to think B's management pursues this and asks if it is something the league is going to be calling consistently. . .
So I've watched basically every game so far this year, I've seen the puck leave the ozone and neutral zone a couple times and nobody was called for a penalty in those instances. So IMO there's no point of emphasis. It's just straight up a Marchand tax.
I'd hope a pool reporter or Monty (but let's be real he won't actually say it's a crap call) would ask that question. I haven't seen anything addressing it, but i also haven't dig into it
I'm not sure what everyone is so up in arms about. It's a penalty per the rules, that's it. Whether or not it gets called is irrelevant, it's an infraction and getting away with it other times or it not being consistently enforced isnt an excuse for stupidly tossing the puck over the glass.
This sounds like Brick complaining about the goal that got overturned even after Razor explained exactly why it's happened.
This sounds like Brick complaining about the goal that got overturned even after Razor explained exactly why it's happened.
It's not that it is inconsistently enforced. It's that it is never enforced. Please find me 10 examples of it in the past 5 years being called.
I have no doubt I’ve missed instances of it being called, but the only time I can remember an o-zone DoG-PoG is a Ducks-Flames game. Dave Lowry flipped the puck over the glass in the last few seconds of a game they were losing 4-0. And even then, the intent was obvious: it was a brawl-filled game, and Craig Bérubé was due to get out of the box with a stoppage in that narrow strip of time before the end of the game. Lowry goes, Bérubé comes on and beats the piss out of Jeff Friesen just because.