3/23 - Bruins at Rags

TFP

Moderator
Moderator
SoSH Member
Dec 10, 2007
20,391
Never hit the net anyways
I thought it was by Toronto after the disaster in the Kings(?) game a couple years ago. I remember Jack flipping out about it last year in a game.

This game is a joke by the way. Although Marchand was offside.
 

The Napkin

wise ass al kaprielian
Moderator
SoSH Member
Jul 13, 2002
28,762
right here
Just start diving and throwing your head back any time a Rag is close. If that's what the league wants play their game and expose it for the fucking joke it is.
 

Dr. Gonzo

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 8, 2010
5,295
You have to think a cheap makeup call is coming the B's way soon.

If so, need to take advantage.
 

kenneycb

Hates Goose Island Beer; Loves Backdoor Play
SoSH Member
Dec 2, 2006
16,189
Tuukka's refugee camp
He was hustling, but he didn't need to go offside there and on top of that he interfered with Lundquist.

And if it did hit the net then why didn't the net move?
He had a guy on his back while skating at a good pace and was offsides by half a puck. The horrors.
 

cshea

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 15, 2006
36,271
306, row 14
I thought it was by Toronto after the disaster in the Kings(?) game a couple years ago. I remember Jack flipping out about it last year in a game.

This game is a joke by the way. Although Marchand was offside.
My understanding is that the puck going out isn't reviewable, at least by coach's challenge. As I remember the decision was made to not worry about it and play on if nobody on the ice notices.

Maybe Toronto can initiate a review, but for some reason I have it in my head that it isn't reviewable at all.
 

catomatic

thinks gen turgidson is super mean!!!
SoSH Member
Jul 16, 2005
3,423
Park Slope, Brooklyn
Marchand was avoiding a two-handed slash, that's why he didn't have the puck on his stick as he went over the line.

I'm incensed by the Krejci call and the non-review of the puck hitting the netting.
 

LogansDad

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 15, 2006
29,990
Alamogordo
You have to think a cheap makeup call is coming the B's way soon.

If so, need to take advantage.
You don't watch many of these games, do you? It's more likely to be 4 PP's for the Rangers than the B's get a cheap call. Rags are gonna have commit murder to get something called against them.
 

timlinin8th

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 6, 2009
1,521
I thought it was by Toronto after the disaster in the Kings(?) game a couple years ago. I remember Jack flipping out about it last year in a game.
The game I remember him flipping out the puck hit the net, came back down, and basically went in the goal off Tuukka's back. The "hitting the net" part wasn't reviewable because it wasn't the last action that caused the puck to go in the net (or something).

Can pucks in the net not actually be challenged by the coaches though? Seems weird to me they can challenge offside but not pucks out of play.
 

The Napkin

wise ass al kaprielian
Moderator
SoSH Member
Jul 13, 2002
28,762
right here
The game I remember him flipping out the puck hit the net, came back down, and basically went in the goal off Tuukka's back. The "hitting the net" part wasn't reviewable because it wasn't the last action that caused the puck to go in the net (or something).

Can pucks in the net not actually be challenged by the coaches though? Seems weird to me they can challenge offside but not pucks out of play.
I want to say Columbus for some reason?
 

BoSoxFink

Stripes
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2006
7,662
South Park
Oh sure..... That's not a cross check. Call a fucking penalty on the Rangers you fucking asshats! These refs are a god damn joke.
 

LogansDad

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 15, 2006
29,990
Alamogordo
I am so fucking sick of officiating deciding who is going to win in sports. There are times that I really don't understand why i can't get myself to quit.
 

soxhop411

news aggravator
SoSH Member
Dec 4, 2009
46,562
That puck 100% hit the netting on the far right of the screen of NBCSN's replay. Fuck that shit, embarrassing. I thought they allowed that to be reviewed??

Also fuck Hayes.

It's only reviewable if it "immediately" leads to a goal.

http://scoutingtherefs.com/2014/12/6605/nhl-clarifies-puck-netting-rule-disallowed-goals/


he wording for Rule 38.4 specifically sets forth how Hockey Operations will continue to interpret this rule:
NOTE: For pucks that hit the spectator netting undetected by the On-Ice Officials, ‘immediately’ shall mean the following:
(a) when the puck strikes the spectator netting and deflects directly into the goal off of any player;
(b) when the puck strikes the spectator netting and falls to the ice and is then directed into the goal by the player who retrieves the puck.
In both of the above scenarios, the Situation Room in Toronto must have definitive video evidence of the puck striking the netting in order to disallow the goal.’
 

LogansDad

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 15, 2006
29,990
Alamogordo
You're a pretty whiney poster, just thought I'd give you that feedback.
I know, I'm sorry. I'm cranky lately and haven't gotten laid in a while. Appreciate the feedback though.

I will also readily admit that I was wrong about the slashing call on Hayes being wrong.
 

PedroSpecialK

Comes at you like a tornado of hair and the NHL sa
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2004
27,169
Cambridge, MA

For as long as Joe Haggerty is a sportswriter, he will forever more be known as the "grammatically illiterate one"
 

TFP

Moderator
Moderator
SoSH Member
Dec 10, 2007
20,391
It's only reviewable if it "immediately" leads to a goal.

http://scoutingtherefs.com/2014/12/6605/nhl-clarifies-puck-netting-rule-disallowed-goals/


he wording for Rule 38.4 specifically sets forth how Hockey Operations will continue to interpret this rule:
NOTE: For pucks that hit the spectator netting undetected by the On-Ice Officials, ‘immediately’ shall mean the following:
(a) when the puck strikes the spectator netting and deflects directly into the goal off of any player;
(b) when the puck strikes the spectator netting and falls to the ice and is then directed into the goal by the player who retrieves the puck.
In both of the above scenarios, the Situation Room in Toronto must have definitive video evidence of the puck striking the netting in order to disallow the goal.’
Thanks. The rule is dumb where that isn't reviewable but an offsides 30 seconds earlier is.
 

Jordu

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2003
9,061
Brookline
That period sucked. The Krejci call was pivotal and it was horseshit.

Also, just wondering: Why bother to have linesmen?
 

cshea

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 15, 2006
36,271
306, row 14
On the bright side, B's had a 20-15 overall and 18-8 at 5x5 shot attempt lead.

The hold on Krejci fucking kills me. My god.
 

McDrew

Set Adrift on Memory Bliss
SoSH Member
Apr 11, 2006
4,079
Portland, OR
Gus in, both of the goals off of horrible defense in front of Tuukka. Get him rested and let him start tomorrow.
 

BoSoxFink

Stripes
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2006
7,662
South Park
I thought tuukka looked slow moving laterally in the first so I'm not surprised to see the change. He was apparently sick yesterday so let him rest up today and go tomorrow hopefully.
 

TFP

Moderator
Moderator
SoSH Member
Dec 10, 2007
20,391
He also went right to the trainer at the end of the period. Not good.