Toss out the rulebook, it doesn't matter anymore: Pens 4, Flyers 1
by Travis Hughes on Mar 27, 2010 4:10 PM EDT
in 09-10 Game Recaps
Email
Print
The Philadelphia Flyers may not be as good as the Pittsburgh Penguins. They might not have deserved to win today at Mellon Arena. But there is absolutely no way in hell that they deserved this fate, either.
We'll start with Johan Backlund, who looked pretty darn solid in two periods of action today. He didn't control his rebounds good enough, but he was solid in his positioning and he looked good enough. It was promising, at least. But as the third period began, Brian Boucher replaced Backlund, who suffered a groin pull.
Who knows how long he'll be out at this point, but we really should have expected it, the way this season has gone. Even more so, we should have expected it the way this game had gone to that point.
There were weak penalty calls all afternoon, but the most egregious came in a 1-1 game during the second period. A Simon Gagne goal was waived off after Ville Leino made incidental contact with Marc-Andre Fleury outside of the goal crease. Never mind that Rule 69.1 clearly states that if incidental contact is made outside the crease, the goal should be allowed.
You know, never mind what the rules say.
From that point on, the Flyers lost all the wind in their sails. Maybe that's the reason why this team isn't going anywhere this season. Maybe it's because when they face adversity, they just crumble in on top of themselves like the building they played in today will in a few months.
But as Ben Feldman said in the game thread, when you're facing adversity and all you're dealt is more adversity -- like losing your goalie or a phantom penalty on Scott Hartnell after he touched Sidney Crosby in the third period or Fleury throwing his stick and the Flyers not getting a penalty shot, for example -- it's hard to over come.
Boston won 5-0 today, so the Flyers are now in eighth place. Speaking of Boston, Matt Cooke had another dirty hit today... this time on Claude Giroux. Luckily, G was fine. Doesn't mean Cooke still isn't a scum bag though.
After the jump, questions with answers and the comment of the day.
Questions with Answers
- Martin Havlat, after the Wild game: "Once they got the lead, they gave up." Does the motivation of playing the Penguins translate into [enter Flyers' marketing slogan here] hockey? The Flyers came to play today, but after all the adversity they faced throughout the game, they certainly looked like they gave up to an extent.
- How's Backlund look? As mentioned, he looked quite solid. It's a damn shame he got hurt, an hopefully it's something minor so he'll get another shot.
- How much does missing Malkin hurt the Pens today? Same goes for Gonchar, if he is indeed out. They probably would've scored some more PP goals if they had those two.
- Can the Flyers win their last regular season game at Mellon Arena? They could have, but they didn't.
Comment of the Day
Has Steigerwald made any jokes about plane crashes yet?
>> Ben Feldman
233 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
I found myself hoping that the entire team/coaching staff would get up off the bench and just leave before the game was over in a display of protest to refereeing that has become a continuous joke.
On the bright side, if the Caps draw Philly, then we can actually figure out which team gets the worst of it!!!
I really feel like the Pens, while not getting ref bias, are getting the benefit of the doubt more than they should.
Cидни Kросби: Александр Oвечкин, он твой папа теперь
Capitals Coming: for Capitals fans no more intelligent than myself
by red army line on Mar 27, 2010 4:29 PM EDT up reply actions
What the hell does it matter at this point? It doesn’t matter. They have seven games left – eleven if they somehow make the playoffs. Let the kid ride it out.
Do you see what happens when you find a stranger in the Alps?
MarioD,
For every insightful post you make, your pet peeves undermine the overall credibility of your comments. We get it… you don’t like JVR. Personally I don’t think he’s playing that badly, and clearly, neither does the coaching staff.. The Flyers were flat today, and got the air sucked out of their game by the ludicrous officiating. I can’t for the life of me see how you can single out this loss on JVR when the entire game after the first goal was a cluster of epic proportions.
He took two more moronic penalties, one of which lead to the game-tying goal, before the officiating was bad.
I think he took one, and I don’t know that a back check on a legitimate scoring chance is moronic. Getting pushed into the goalie — I don’t think that’s a penalty at all.
you really should think about what you say before you post it…the first penatly was a load of shit…as were half the other ones…2nd hes a rookie, in college, they play like 30-35 gams, not 82. So therefor maybe hes tiered? ever think of that? Its just a little jump, i mean if you trash him so much maybe you should dress and go play, then all of us here can rip you apart. Why do you even bother? You never have one good thing to say about any of the teams. Your a waste, and annoyance to everyone else on here who appreciates the sport.
So therefor maybe hes tiered? ever think of that?
Welcome to six months ago. My posts in September/October 1, 2009:
The big piece you are missing in your post is that JVR has never played more than 40 games in a season. Unless he was on HGH all summer, his body will not be productive for 82 games this year.
The comparison I’ve seen made is to Blake Wheeler last season. (Game Log)
The same comment is made about every NBA rookie every year who is also twenty years old. And every NFL rookie.
It is totally legit. Especially this season, when the schedule is way more compact.
Does October count? Yes, but it’d be nice to have a player who could play the entire season for $1.6 million. Wheeler was a healthy scratch a number of games down the stretch.
.
But you know what counts more? The Playoffs. And Blake Wheeler was so tired that he was benched for the team’s last three playoff games after putting up an underwhelming 0 points, and a +/- of 0 in eight playoff games.
.
Congrats to wheeler on three great months of hockey. If JVR does what Wheeler did, the Flyers are going to have to send him down and trade for a forward to play the other five months of the hockey.
...
not tryin to be an @$$ but how is he supposed to learn to play an 82 game season then? if he doesnt take hgh or gain the experience by playing a full 82 game season? also to argue the point that you make about sending him to the ahl, many talented hard working players benifit more from playing at a higher level not all players can handle it but to get better a player must be forced beyond his usual. i dont think that the ahl would have challenged him enough at this point, just like how i dont think that him staying in the ncaa was best for his development.
by flyersfangiroux on Mar 27, 2010 8:23 PM EDT up reply actions
if you continue reading i say i dont think jvr would have grown as much if he had played in the ahl, and also just out of curiosity who would you replace him with on the roster?
by flyersfangiroux on Mar 27, 2010 8:45 PM EDT up reply actions
He wouldn’t have killed the Flyers for three months either. And thats the ultimate goal.
They could’ve signed any number of free agents with his $1.6m salary freed up.
can you elaborate on what you mean by killing the flyers for three months, and just what FA would you have signed instead?
by flyersfangiroux on Mar 27, 2010 8:50 PM EDT up reply actions
Look about 15 posts down. Or just watch a game. You’ll see JVR headmanning the puck to the other team on the PP to create SH scoring chances, taking roughly a penalty a game, standing around in all three zones watching the other 9 guys on the ice play, failing to receive passes on odd-man rushes then falling and crashing into the wall (untouched) while the play goes the other way…
Pretty much anything except playing good hockey.
im not calling him a star or anything but i think he deserves to be on this team…ive played competatvie hockey my entire life and thats what happens when you move up a level (in speed and physicallity) its very intimidating, and i also believe it is due somewhat to his concussion at the beginning of the season, ive had several concussions, my most recent one being about a year ago and im barely settleling back to my normal play (due to being nervous of getting hit in the head again)
by flyersfangiroux on Mar 27, 2010 9:04 PM EDT up reply actions
because what i was trying to convey is that it takes experience to recover from that, and to develop, i was one of the top d in my league but after my concussion i became an almost liability to my team, benching me would not have allowed me to recover, i just had to get my feel back for the game
by flyersfangiroux on Mar 27, 2010 9:09 PM EDT up reply actions
I don’t care about his fucking development. He can develop in the AHL.
The Flyers need a third line winger who isn’t “an almost liability to my team”
i couldnt find your post on who you would replace him with…could you repost that here for me…
by flyersfangiroux on Mar 27, 2010 9:17 PM EDT up reply actions
and why dont you care about his development, if he continues to play for the flyers he needs to develop to take a more major role on the team, and if we trade him, he needs to develop so we can get the most value out of him.
by flyersfangiroux on Mar 27, 2010 9:21 PM EDT up reply actions
The Flyers already traded the future for this season. It’s no time to coddle crappy players, and that’s exactly what JVR is.
Crappy is a little harsh. He shows sighns of being a great player down the line, but hes never played this long, and is a rookie. And like you said, if the season is a wash at this point, why bother taking him out now.
"Sugah n' rainbows"
"We will steal the show, jolly Rogers go, we are wolves of the sea."
For a while I tried to defend JVR, which surprises even me because I can’t stand him and never really did but over the last month or two he has been absolute garbage and does not deserve to be on the Flyers. Period. He is too soft to be a professional hockey player. I don’t think that will ever change, that was always my biggest criticism of his.
He is too soft to be a professional hockey player. I don’t think that will ever change, that was always my biggest criticism of his.
Unless you know the man personally, this is a baseless statement. He’s 20 years old and is still growing, physically and professionally. The whole team is having a lousy season. Let’s not throw out the baby with the bathwater.
Do you see what happens when you find a stranger in the Alps?
by mikefive on Mar 27, 2010 9:35 PM EDT up reply actions 2 recs
Weak how? I honestly dont know how to judge that comment, are you saying that hes weak in the send=se that hes not Kanuble, because then your asking a playmaker to be a power forward. Other then that, hes stronger then giroux. Minus the supernatural puck handeling skills, they are both the same style player, which is why playing them on the same line is idiotic by the coach.
And giroux is not a center. As much as the organization wants him to be, he will always be what he is this year. Hes not goint to hit his full potential until hes put on RW again.
"Sugah n' rainbows"
"We will steal the show, jolly Rogers go, we are wolves of the sea."
I didn’t say weak I said soft. And to mikefive, I don’t need to know someone personally to know that he is too soft, and maybe I should clarify, too soft physically to be a professional hockey player. And as chance would happen, I do know him personally. I have nothing against him as a person. Played against him many times growing up. But as was the case then it remains the case now. He is 6 foot 3, roughly 210 lbs and he plays like he is 5’6 185. How often do you see him go into corners and battle for the puck? How often do you see him try and establish positioning? The answer to both questions is almost never. I am not a big Danny Briere fan, far from it actually but I see a whole lot more effort and physicality in his play on any given night than I have seen from JVR all season.
flyersfangiroux
You build the load up in stages and not do it like the way the Flyers did. Often in the military, over a two month period, recuirts are put thru the rigors of basic training because this will shock the body into a prolonged overcompensation phase. The over compensation phase is the holy grail of athletic training because it enables the body to take on more load , work with greater intensity and without as much fatigue. The overcompensation phase is a point in the recovery process inbetween workouts or games where the body makes more of whatever was depleted in the previous worklout. Your body, because all that athletic activity disrupts you resting homeostatic state, is convinced your trying to kill it. So to ensure this doesn’t happen again your body overproduces or overcompensates to prepare the body. Now knowing when it will hit involves more sports science which in this post I don’t have time to elaborate on. So back to my point ….this works on the recruits so well as they typically haven’t experience that intensity before and thus their neuromuscular plasiticity is still very pliant unlike a young athlete such as JVR who in achieving this level of play spent years and years of playing the sport whereby his body’s neuromuscular pathways and neurochemistry is primed for hockey. The subsequent adaptations of muscle and various body systems limit the athlete’s neuromuscular plasticity such that dramatic increases in load to induce this prolonged overcompensation will most likely fail. Now on a smaller scale this is possible but it must be done sparingly and in the right places and times. A good example of this would be the occassional post practice or post game “suicide sprints” up and down the the court, rink or field.. So basically with JVR your seeing a body that is not prepared for he loads being asked of because his body is already highly conditoned for the ones he played with in college. Now other young players in particular the Canadian ones are seeing such great results in the NHL that I believe the Flyers felt that JVR as he is of the same age was prepared to tak on on as much load as they did. The difference is that Canadian AAA Minor Rep. hockey is the arm of Canada’s 400 million dollars a year hockey mill* which has select teenagers playing seasons up to 60 games long. JVR is used to seeing 40 games, big difference. There’s more to it that this but when your typing is so slow like mine and seems like it would improve if you taped hammers to your wrists like mine it’s best to stop. But,this is the the gist of it . Pardon any typo’s .
instead of a FA
why couldn’t we have just kept knuble for another year or 2 and let jvr develop in the ahl? knuble is having another great year and i do like jvr but i think he would have killed it for the phantoms this year and gain enough confidence and experience to play at a higher level next year
by Carcillo's Mustache on Mar 27, 2010 11:44 PM EDT up reply actions
This always pains me to do, but … that’s exactly where JVR belonged this season, so you’re right Mario. I did argue for that here before the season started, and while JVR played pretty well before Xmas, he’s been basically done since then.
I do still wonder how they would have stuffed another forward under the cap, but I suppose it could have been done.
And while I am emasculating myself, I DO think that the majority of the calls went the Pens way in the game, and the Flyers got screwed. ESPECIALLY the non-call on the Cooke highsticking to Giroux. Shouldn’t matter in that case, and apparently didn’t later when the Flyers were whistled for a very similar instance.
Another item to look at besides the number of games and being tired, is that JVR is not of the pedigree of other high drafted players. Especially at #2. It wasn’t a great draft year and the Flyers took who was there but the difference between he and Kane and really most top five prospects is the level of competition. JVR played two years of college hockey. Vermont is a nice program but it doesn’t even hold a candle to playing even one year in a Canadian major junior program. JVR almost doesn’t even know what being a pro hockey player means let alone not having the acumen at this point to compete. He has the raw skill and size but he is a real project. Saying all of that is why he should have played at least one year in the AHL if not two. Just being tired isn’t the whole picture.
Just Call Me "M"!
these guys are already putting in 60 game seasons as teenagers…I said this before JVR is like polyurethane finish…the kids from Canada hockey hatcheries are like french polish
Yea that is totally correct. Mario is right with a lot of his points about JVR’s play and his impact on the cap. But the real bottom line here is that he is a talent the Flyers need to see flourish and to do that he needed to play in the AHL for at least one whole season. To not see that and be in a position of GM is the problem with the organization. Forget the cap and the free agent signings, really anyone can get that messed up, but to mishandle a kid like JVR really shows why this guy doesn’t know what he is doing,
Just Call Me "M"!
Seriously I'm sick of that Canadien Junior is so great and US college sucks
Bullshit.
And btw, JVR played at UNH in hockey east. His team lost to BU, which won the NCAA. If you recall he was only a sophmore.
Yeah, that’s not how that works.
First off, take a look at his season. I’m well beyond having been proved correct already.
Second, JVR sucking for seven more games would only bolster my position. Him being hurt and not playing would let halt the free-fall his season is in.
should we bench hartnell too? he has the same number of goals and only 9 more assists than JVR this year despite getting a ton more ice time and playing with briere and carter every shift. there’s no official stat for turnovers off of ill-advised cross-ice passes, but hartnell certainly leads the team in that department
i’m posting arguments based on statistics (which of course don’t tell the whole story, but they’re usually pretty good indicators of performance). what are yours based on?
Then you just don’t know how to look at stats.
Since the Olympic Break
JVR: 1g, 1pt
Hartnell: 2g, 7pts
not sure if you’re joking since the sample size is so small. but if we go along with this kind of reasoning, what did you think about hartnell scoring 1 goal in 19 games this season – again, playing with offensive talent like briere and carter every shift and getting more ice time?
Blair Betts went like 20 games without a goal! Don’t just take him out of the lineup, release him immediately.
GOALS ARE ALL THAT MATTER!!!
yeah, i would agree he should sit or move down a line if he were a 2nd-liner who’s expected to score 20 a season instead of a 4th-line defensive specialist
Ah, so there are other things that matter besides scoring goals. Like, I don’t know:
Assists? Hartnell 28, JVR 18
Hits? Hartnell 126, JVR 33
Blocked Shots? Hartnell 26, JVR 20
how many of those 10 assists are due to getting a lot more ice time (inc. pp) and playing with briere and carter instead of powe/asham and giroux? those 6 extra blocked shots?
i can’t argue with the hits, jvr’s physical game sucks. but then again, i would rank hits very low on the totem pole of meaningful statistics
And here’s the real kicker:
Penalties
Hartnell: 24 taken, 20 drawn. (drawn/taken ratio: .833)
JVR: 11 taken, 8 drawn. (drawn/taken: .727)
at this rate it will seem no wins either.
I wasn't even a year old but I stayed up to be outside the Vet with my Dad and Mom when the Phillies won the World Series 1980.
by Christopher A on Mar 27, 2010 10:13 PM EDT up reply actions
Shoeless Joe Jackson would be impressed with the NHL. And the Flyers for that matter . . .
@Mitchman88 on Twitter
Srange
I listen to the NHL on Sirius satellite Radio and I’m eager to hear what they will have to say this week about this. And never an explanation from the league ever. After the FSN situation earlier in the year, what can we expect. Penguins, like the Flyers will not go far in the playoffs.
by Antman388 on Mar 27, 2010 4:53 PM EDT via mobile reply actions
The Hartnell penalty on Crosby was the most blatant example of Crosby bias I have ever seen. Hartnell gets hit by Crosby, 1 leg comes up do to him being knocked off balance. Crosby grabs the leg both players go down. 2 min on Hartnell for interference. Amazing. Can you imagine the media backlash if the Flyers were a Canadian team? Makes the Burrows incident look like nothing…
There 3rd goal was great as well. Cooke locks Parent’s stick under his arm takes it away. Fedentiko cross checks Bartilous in the back so he can’t play the puck. Pengiuns goal. I just might stop watching its unbearable.
I can’t help but think that Gary Bettman is sitting up in the press box during Penguins games so that anytime something questionable happens to the Penguins he can get up, do the Jedi Mind Trick and reverse whatever call the referee is going to make. I swear to God that is exactly what happened when Gagne scored. Yes, he can do it from that far away, he is a very powerful Sith.
Oh, This is bound to be good
You can't, but you thought that You could
Great call by Travis - just to be clear, you can see on the replay Fleury is 2 feet outside the crease when Leino runs into him. If my memory servers.. that’s the 3rd time this season Gagne has got screwed out of the goal this season.
-WTF was the penalty call on JVR running into the goalie, when it was clear he was pushed/checked into him.
-WTF phantom call on Hartnell. When people complain about preferential treatment given to Crosby by the NHL officials, that out to be exhibit A.
-WTF penguins goal 3. Are you really allowed to wrap a guy’s stick under your arm while facing the ref as you slide on your ass, or is that holding in this league?
Can you also cross check a guy from behind in the crease on the same play, knocking him out of the way so you can net an empty netter? I’m not as clear on that rule.
Sadly, as good as Backlund looked early, he shouldn’t have played. He had a groin injury he was nursing going in, and those are notoriously hard to heal from, especially when you’re a goalie. I have a feeling he injured it on the first goal when he made the attempt to slide across in the splits. I doubt we’ll see him again this year.
Overall, this was a game where the Flyers looked beaten and out of it by the end of the 2nd. The worst thing about it, is that it was a winnable game. I wish there was something positive to take away, but frankly there isn’t.
Quote from Gagne:
"I asked [Marouelli] what happened because he called it a goal, he was behind the net," Gagne said. "He’s the one that changed his decision by looking at the scoreboard. I don’t understand. I don’t know if you are allowed to do that …
and
"To me, if it’s obstruction on the goalie, it has to be [called] right away. Maybe 10-15 seconds. Not a minute after the goal. It gave us a 2-1 lead on the road. Maybe it would be different."
@Mitchman88 on Twitter
I knew what the Refs did was wrong. That is not a reviewable play. They called it a goal on the ice and they can’t change their mind two minutes later by looking at the Jumbotron. Marouelli should have delayed signalling it was goal and conferred with the linesmen. This is bullshit!
@Mitchman88 on Twitter
by Mitchell Green on Mar 27, 2010 6:05 PM EDT up reply actions
The best part is the did the exact opposite last game. They reviewed the call this game, and flipped it. Last game, they saw the obstruction on Volchankov and didn’t flip it. Unbelievable.
by orangeandblack20 on Mar 27, 2010 7:58 PM EDT up reply actions
Gagne needs to stop talking about the refs to the press. I’m sure it’s frustrating, but it’s only going to get worse if the bitching gets outside the locker room.
Can you blame him really? The man just about had his neck broken and a goal taken away from him, all in the same week. He is getting shafted and its been happening all year!
@Mitchman88 on Twitter
by Mitchell Green on Mar 27, 2010 6:45 PM EDT up reply actions
well that’s two goals against pittsburgh specifically that have been taken away from him this year. not that i’m wearin my tinfoil hat or anything, but damnit, why does it always have to be pittsburgh this shit happens against? can’t we just compete on a level playing field and lose to them fair-and-square?
"He told me, 'Keep your head up.' I didn't realize he meant the whole season."
Thats all I ask. I am not looking for any favors from the refs. I just want to know that both sides are going to get called equally and that the refs are going to do the job they are being paid to do, not decide the outcome of the game.
@Mitchman88 on Twitter
by Mitchell Green on Mar 27, 2010 6:52 PM EDT up reply actions
He’s not bitching about the refs now because these two calls were worse than any others that went against the team all season; he’s bitching about the refs now because the entire team is frustrated with everything that has happened this season. I sympathize, but it isn’t constructive.
I understand and I think you are right. This team has no accountability. I think that even if all the bad officiating hadn’t have happened the Flyers still would have lost and the players would be pointing the finger at all kinds of things. However, his anger with the refs is also is justified. It should have been a goal and the fact that Marouelli used the replay from the Jumbotron is WRONG! He cannot do that. Its just a shame because it can be used as an excuse for why the Flyers didn’t win which, like you said, is not constuctive. I wish they had of been beaten without all the drama so they would have no where to point the finger but at themselves.
@Mitchman88 on Twitter
by Mitchell Green on Mar 27, 2010 7:09 PM EDT up reply actions
That game was over when they changed the call. We had no shot.
by orangeandblack20 on Mar 27, 2010 7:59 PM EDT up reply actions
i knew the pens announcers were going to annoy me. but they blazed new paths in fueling my silent rage. they are without a doubt the worst broadcasting team in hockey. every sentence borders on libel and ignorance.
Eat what the monkey eats, then eat the monkey. -U.S. Navy survival guidance
Why didn’t Crosby get a penalty for doing exactly the same thing as JVR. Neither player was in control of his body at the time of impact but yet one guy is considered interfering and the other is not. And the other one that had me steaming was that MAF clearly threw his stick out in front of him on the scoring opportunity, F_ing Clearly! I hate being a ref whiner but this shit has gone on for decades and it is not just a friggin coincidence. Dammit, I don’t believe they should have won the game or anything but that was highway robbery.
Just Call Me "M"!
The refs were so bad, I turned off the game after Pen’s 2nd goal. I cannot watch bias refs in any game. If I was a Pen fan, I would be very happy today because the refs won this game for them. Just like earlier this year.
Management needs to file complaints with the league about the refs in this game. It will not make a difference but the players need to see some support from management. As stated, you cannot fight City Hall.
On another note, we need a goalie. Boosh does not have “it” anymore.
Finally, the blogging today is awesome and on mark. Great job!
Laviolette:
"That’s the thing with the scoreboards now," said Laviolette. "That’s happened to us twice when there seems to be a delay in the call and things get checked out, and then the call is made. The referee, made the call. Initially there was a goal. He was staring at the whole play and made the call. He’s the one that had the best view."
@Mitchman88 on Twitter
Maybe I see it differently,
But after Gagne scored, the other ref and/or linesman conferred w/ Marouelli and told him that a Flyers player had interfered w/ MAF. I doubt the other ref saw that MAF was outside the crease, but it looked like interference to me, especially since they had just called a guy for running Fleury a few minutes earlier. Strange sequence, but the goal can be overturned if a penalty occurs prior to the goal. What is weird is that they didn’t put a Flyer in the box. I think they had been called for 4 penalties up to that point, to none for the Pens, so the ref refusing to call the penalty after disallowing the goal was basically a “gift” to the Flyers.
I doubt the other ref saw that MAF was outside the crease, but it looked like interference to me, especially since they had just called a guy for running Fleury a few minutes earlier. Strange sequence, but the goal can be overturned if a penalty occurs prior to the goal. What is weird is that they didn’t put a Flyer in the box. I think they had been called for 4 penalties up to that point, to none for the Pens, so the ref refusing to call the penalty after disallowing the goal was basically a "gift" to the Flyers.
This entire section is incorrect.
I doubt the other ref saw that MAF was outside the crease,
If he couldn’t see whether Fluery was outside of the crease then he couldn’t have seen much of anything. Further, Marouelli certainly would’ve told him “Fleury was outside the crease, that’s why I immediately called it a goal.”
but it looked like interference to me,
Not sure what rule you’re using, but by the definition of goaltender interference given by the NHL rulebook, it wasn’t.
especially since they had just called a guy for running Fleury a few minutes earlier.
Completely irrelevant
Strange sequence, but the goal can be overturned if a penalty occurs prior to the goal.
There was no penalty, therefore the goal can’t be overturned legally.
What is weird is that they didn’t put a Flyer in the box.
Because it wasn’t interference
I think they had been called for 4 penalties up to that point, to none for the Pens, so the ref refusing to call the penalty after disallowing the goal was basically a "gift" to the Flyers.
Gee, thanks. Mariouelli fucked the Flyers in the ass, but then he gave them a towel to clean themselves up with.
Beautifully done, Mario.
@Mitchman88 on Twitter
by Mitchell Green on Mar 27, 2010 8:03 PM EDT up reply actions
There was no penalty, therefore the goal can’t be overturned legally.
Technically, the goal only stands if the attacking player made “reasonable effort to avoid such contact.”
http://www.nhl.com/ice/page.htm?id=26480
Even though the contact was incidental, if the refs feel that Leino didn’t make reasonable effort to avoid contact, they can legally overturn the goal. Not saying whether or not Leino tried to get out of the way or not, but that’s most likely the interpretation the referees were going with. If they were, it would explain why there was no penalty on the play and the goal was disallowed.
by Hatt the Moople on Mar 27, 2010 9:17 PM EDT up reply actions
Correct me if I’m wrong, but Leino went for the puck, lost it at his feet, got pushed, and had his skate bump Fleury’s. I don’t think there was too much he could have done. And the ref was looking in that spot the whole time, because that’s where the puck was.
Do you see what happens when you find a stranger in the Alps?
Like I said, I’m not saying whether or not Lieno tried to get out of the way, I’m just saying there is an interpretation of this rule which would disallow the goal and not result in a penalty, which is probably the road the referees were taking.
by Hatt the Moople on Mar 27, 2010 9:29 PM EDT up reply actions
I’m not disagreeing with you. I understand how the refs were able to do what they did. But it looked to me like Leino didn’t have a choice in hitting Fleury. In other words, his “making a reasonable effort” to avoid contact wasn’t really possible.
Do you see what happens when you find a stranger in the Alps?
And then somehow Fleury’s legs scissor-locked Leno’s ankle and drug him down. But that was Leino’s fault, per Rule 87(b)
remind me what clause 87(b) says again…is it the one about ‘any act resulting in future possibility of penguins loss’ or about how "any said act against said player on pittsburgh shall be reprimanded by either loss of goal or missonduct penalty’
by flyersfangiroux on Mar 27, 2010 9:43 PM EDT up reply actions
It’s hard to say. He comes on that hard line along the width of the ice and doesn’t really change his trajectory when Fleury stepped out in front of him, not that he had a whole lot of time to. I’d really have a hard time discounting an argument from either side, honestly.
by Hatt the Moople on Mar 27, 2010 9:46 PM EDT up reply actions
doesn’t really change his trajectory when Fleury stepped out in front of him
Yeah, I wonder if thats because the Penguins’ Dman pulled his legs out from under him at the same time?
Fleury was out of the crease before McKee brought his stick down; Lieno’s trajectory was already set. And I know what you’re getting at, but McKee’s stick hit the puck before it hit Lieno’s skates, so it’s not a trip either.
by Hatt the Moople on Mar 27, 2010 9:52 PM EDT up reply actions
I didn’t say it was a penalty.
But he pulled Leino’s left foot off the ice. Therefore, there is no “reasonable effort” possibly when you’re having your skates pulled up in the air.
If you look at his trajectory before he got tripped, he’s heading right for Fleury. Before the trip, he doesn’t appear to adjust himself to miss the goaltender. A credible argument could have been made either way for the call.
by Hatt the Moople on Mar 27, 2010 9:58 PM EDT up reply actions
Either the refs saw what I described, or the league has a conspiracy theory set up that fixes games in the Penguins favor. I went with the reasoning that wasn’t full of crazy.
by Hatt the Moople on Mar 28, 2010 10:36 AM EDT up reply actions
You did?
Your reasoning is that the refs called back a goal because three seconds earlier a player was skating in the same general direction the goaltender was in.
That’s utterly absurd.
If a player runs over the goalie and makes no reasonable effort to get out of the way, they can call a goal back. That’s the rule. There was enough evidence that Lieno wasn’t going to get out of the way that the refs made the call, regardless of what happened immediately before the point of impact. How is that more crazy than a conspiracy theory involving every referee in the league, and several members of its front office?
by Hatt the Moople on Mar 28, 2010 12:21 PM EDT up reply actions
Because the rule isn’t “If it seems like the player still would’ve made contact with the goalie even if he hadn’t been tripped”.
Its utterly absurd to say his trajectory was leading to contact, therefore it doesn’t matter that he got tripped. It’s so stupefyingly illogical I don’t see why I even have to explain how many ways Leino could’ve avoided contact with Fleury had he not been tripped up by the Penguins dman.
The rule discusses “no reasonable effort.” Lieno got tripped, but he didn’t twist to try to get out of the way, he didn’t try to avoid contact, he just fell on him, impeding his ability to make the stop.
by Hatt the Moople on Mar 28, 2010 12:45 PM EDT up reply actions
I guess you’ll see what you want to see. I didn’t realize logic=trolling.
I like the Flyers, by the way. I wish every year could see a Pittsburgh-Philly Conference Final. I just hate how the team has no accountability. Every time the team has a bad game, there’s some excuse. Here, the refs made a perfectly logical call based on the evidence they saw, and you’re crying conspiracy. Why don’t you get on your team instead for packing it in after the goal was called off?
by Hatt the Moople on Mar 28, 2010 1:16 PM EDT up reply actions
Here, the refs made a perfectly logical call based on the evidence they saw
Yes. Yes they did.
Then, after the Flyers were done celebrating and the teams were ready for a face-off, the refs proceeded to concoct an explanation that defies the plain meaning of the rule and take a goal away from the Flyers.
Buh-bye!
There’s more than one ref on the ice. The ref who called it a goal was on the opposite side of the net as the contact. The other ref immediately waved his arms, calling it off. They discussed it, and called the goal off. There was no defying the meaning of the rule, they called it according to the rule and what they saw.
by Hatt the Moople on Mar 28, 2010 1:22 PM EDT up reply actions
You obviously don’t come around here often because the fans here are quick to blame players/coaches/gm etc. You just happen to be commenting on one game where the officiating was so awful that it played a part in the game. No one here said the Flyers lost because of the officials. But it played a significant role.
I meant more with Flyers fans I know in general. There are guys out there who believe that Bettman hates the Flyers because of how rough they were during the BSB days (forget the fact that Bettman had nothing to do with the league back then).
by Hatt the Moople on Mar 28, 2010 1:25 PM EDT up reply actions
There are people like this with every single team in the league. Flyers fans think there’s a conspiracy. Pens fans think there’s a conspiracy. Caps fans, Wings fans, Sharks fans, Panthers fans, Predators fans, Flames fans.
Every team has them. I’m one of the most realistic people there are when it comes to this stuff, but you can’t sit there and tell me the officiating was good yesterday. It was a disaster.
Broad Street Hockey - SBN's Philadelphia Flyers blog. Got goaltending? Searching since 1987.
by Travis Hughes on Mar 28, 2010 2:11 PM EDT up reply actions
Definitely, there were a lot of questionable calls made yesterday. I’m just trying to give the refs the benefit of the doubt and examine where they were coming from logically instead of assuming they’re all unethical sheep.
by Hatt the Moople on Mar 28, 2010 3:36 PM EDT up reply actions
That's not what they believe
What they believe is that Bettman is a moron (true) who oversees an inept officiating department (true) and inexplicable decisions coming down from Bettman’s lapdog Colin Campbell, and that he very much wants Sidney Crosby and the Penguins to succeed (true) because Crosby from the day he was drafted was anointed by the NHL as its poster boy, heir apparent to Gretsky… (also true) and future saviour. I’m sure this plays great in Pittsburgh, but elsewhere — well not so much.
It’s not much of a stretch from there to think that some of that bias from the front office just seeps down into the calls. If not, then how does one explain how Matt Cooke who is one of the most despised cheap shot artists in the NHL continues to get away with attempts to injure other players (with some success in fact.. just go ask Marc Savard who is done for the year) and doesn’t seem to ever draw a penalty or a suspension, and meanwhile Scott Hartnell, who is seen as a “pest” draws a penalty for having the temerity to take a check along the boards from “Sid the kid”.
We laugh about it now, because it has become that sort of bad joke.
Yeah we’re just paranoid though — right?
“A possible goal by Simon Gagne was being reviewed by the replay war room in Toronto, but FSN Pittsburgh didn’t supply the league with all available angles.
The angles they offered were inconclusive, but one angle that was not sent to Toronto clearly showed the puck in the net."
The rule I referenced specifically refers to contact outside the crease…
by Hatt the Moople on Mar 28, 2010 1:11 PM EDT up reply actions
Idea: Hockey Goal Incident Analyzer
We need forensic traffic accident analysis for this shit…hey a possible app. for officials… they can down load the replay on their I-phones and it run through the
ACME “Hey, Wha’ Happened?” Hockey Cluster Fuck – O – lator, Flyers Edition X-2000.
Has Fred Willard’s signature engraved on the side. And four action buttons that say, " Hey, Wha’ Happened?" , “I can’t do my wurk”, “i don’t think so” and the kid’s favorite, " I got a weal rewd wagun!"
.
Just watched the NHL.com highlights package:
The Penguins third goal was just absolutely ridiculous. Reading descriptions on here doesn’t do it justice. Cooke steals Parent’s stick, Fedotenko cross-checks Bartulis, then the goal is scored.
The Hartnell penalty leading to the fourth goal was also absolute crap.
Didn’t see the hit on Giroux though, anybody have video of that?
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
by Geoff Detweiler on Mar 27, 2010 8:04 PM EDT reply actions
Wait… you missed the play where Giroux went in on a breakaway and Fleury threw his stick. Of course there was no call on the play.
Oh, I saw that too. That was also bad.
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
by Geoff Detweiler on Mar 27, 2010 8:15 PM EDT up reply actions
Oh, I forgot about the most ridiculous call:
“The goal has been disallowed due to incidental contact.”
That’s the most obvious contradiction ever. As Travis so beautifully explained, goals are allowed for incidental contact, not disallowed.
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
by Geoff Detweiler on Mar 27, 2010 8:08 PM EDT reply actions
Over at Pensburgh, they called out Lappy for being a minus 3. Lappy is tougher then the entire Penguins roster combined. Remember when he took a slapshot to the face? He got a bunch of stitches and finished the game. Remember when Crosby got an ouchie on his ankle in game 7 of the stanley cup? He was too hurt to finish the game but he was fine when it was time to raise the cup.
Something I just saw:
In CSN’s recap:
"It was the first period, a couple minutes before their first goal, I was sliding to my left and I heard something snap there," Backlund recalled. "I wanted to continue. I felt so much adrenalin. But it got worse and worse. The second period it felt pretty bad."
Dude effin hears his groin snap and plays for an additional 20 minutes. Can we just name this guy the heart of the team already?
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
by Geoff Detweiler on Mar 27, 2010 8:18 PM EDT reply actions
I don’t know what you’re saying here, but if you’re suggesting that he played 20 minutes with a “snapped” groin because he was worried about his contract situation, you’re even more cynical than I thought.
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
by Geoff Detweiler on Mar 27, 2010 8:28 PM EDT up reply actions
Oh, the other side of that is: If you’re suggesting that he played 20 minutes with a “snapped” groin because he was living his dream of playing in the NHL, then I’d agree.
Either way, the guy played with a groin injury. Respect.
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
by Geoff Detweiler on Mar 27, 2010 8:29 PM EDT up reply actions
The guy was going to get, maybe, two starts in the NHL this year before going on the market.
It was his chance to possibly earn a contract. Leaving the game after 10 minutes destroys that idea. He’s not hoping for an AHL deal next season.
No words. Your cynicism is just sad.
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
by Geoff Detweiler on Mar 27, 2010 8:34 PM EDT up reply actions
The good thing coming out of all of this. I can’t find the article, but someone else posted that, I believe, Panaccio reported a few weeks ago that JVR was getting close to meeting a +/- bonus in his contract. Now that he’s all the way down to +1, I’m assuming he won’t be getting that bonus, which resolves some of the confusion over whether the bonus applies this year or next.
Ultimately, the Flyers have made their own bed this season, and it’s almost beddy-bye time for them.
However, I cannot help but feel that the league has really shafted them on a couple of occasions. Today was particularly egregious. I’m starting to feel like hockey = wrestling, what with the calls going to favor the “good guys” most of the time.
Snider is probably beside himself.
Do you see what happens when you find a stranger in the Alps?
Atlanta wins. 2 pts back with seven games to play.
Rangers in OT in Toronto, so they’re within 4 points of the Flyers.
Well at least that means they’ll have a busy offseason.
Do you see what happens when you find a stranger in the Alps?
Are you kidding? Snider’s probably on his way to the ER right now. He’s not going to want to sit still if the Flyers miss the playoffs. Hell, he’s not going to want to sit still anyway.
Changes will be made. They always are. They don’t always work, but they will be done.
Do you see what happens when you find a stranger in the Alps?
Well I know Snider cares about the team certainly more so that the phantom 5 that own the Phillies. I mean if they’re wasn’t a cap he’d give up a kidney if it meant another chance at the Cup. The Phillies ownership let the team walk into the plays -off with a MASH unit for a bull pen which to my utter amazement did well in the post season but for a few rough outings. I mean Christ a million or two to get more viable BP arm when there’s a chance to make MLB history as he only NL team since the 70’s Red’s to repeat a WS, wasn’t too much to ask esp. as the Phillies have been, until of late, one of the worst fiancially managed teams in the history of MLB and according to many sports economists before our new found success that the Phillies, under the curent ownership group, have been the worst performing team relative to it’s market . Had it been Snider it’d been more like “just tell how much Rube…I’ll find a way”. But Snider is his own worst enemy as well. He always puts a good to great product and in many respects the team is one of the gems of the city. I wouldn’t say he’s snow blinded by the past ..he’s a successful business man and that doesn’t happen without some understanding of innovation, ,but he overvalues or undervalues some part of the game and it’s cost us esp. in capped league. What that is I’m don’t know, but it reminds me what the Braves did in their years of dominace: they overvalued pitching to a point they didn’t need to i.e. 4th and 5th spots in the rotation. but most importantly to the the detrement of their hitting. And the Braves “dominance” only won them 1 WS out 5 tries.
Crosby is such a cry ass and cheap player, he tackles hartnell to the ice and hartnell gets the whistle. This is a joke and this is why referees should be suspended on bad decisions just like players should. I can understand some things and certain calls but not that.
If you watch the replay, he checked Hartnell into the boards, and on the way down, Scotty’s arm swung down towards Crosby’s head. I’m pretty sure that’s why the refs called Hart for roughing
by Hatt the Moople on Mar 27, 2010 10:33 PM EDT up reply actions
He got the call because he’s Crosby, bottom line, he gets better treatment and he isn’t even the best player in the NHL Ovechkin is. Swinging arm or not they should of at least had matching minors.
while I still agree Ovie is the best player, Crosby is a very close #2 and is the #1 marketable player in the league. Thats why he gets the special treatment.
"Sugah n' rainbows"
"We will steal the show, jolly Rogers go, we are wolves of the sea."
I dislike Crosby as much as the next guy but he is the best player in the NHL and the gap between him and Ovie is rather wide.
you’re comparing two completely different players, sid is the best well-rounded player in the league and the best team player in the league, but ovi has the most talent, has top end speed, hits hard and has a wicked shot/net prensence. its like trying to compare rolls royce to ferrari-the’re both exellent cars, but meant for completely different purposes
by flyersfangiroux on Mar 28, 2010 1:59 PM EDT up reply actions
I agree except I don’t think Ovie has more talent. In fact, I think Alexander Semin is the most talented player on the Caps.
why do you say that? i dont get to watch the caps too frequently
by flyersfangiroux on Mar 28, 2010 2:03 PM EDT up reply actions
For the same reason I think Crosby is more talented. Ovie is a hell of a skater, has possibly the best shot in the game and a killer instinct but all he is, is a powerful scorer. He doesn’t take faceoffs. He doesn’t kill penalties or play defense what so ever. Hell, when the Caps receive bench minors Ovie is sent to the box because he serves no purpose trying to kill a penalty. He is a one dimensional player. Albeit fantastic at that one thing but that’s it. Semin’s one weakness is his durability. But I think from a talent perspective, Semin can do many things where Ovie is limited to one or two.
k gotcha…what i was trying to illude to is that ovi cant play many roles, but if the caps were to somehow give him the proper coaching/instruction (they never will and if they did he would never agree to it) he has enough talent/anility to become the best,
by flyersfangiroux on Mar 28, 2010 2:16 PM EDT up reply actions
What would you have called on Crosby? His hit was clean.
by Hatt the Moople on Mar 27, 2010 10:56 PM EDT up reply actions
your right, his hit was clean, but Hartnell did nothing that deserved a penalty.
"Sugah n' rainbows"
"We will steal the show, jolly Rogers go, we are wolves of the sea."
The only thing I can see that would be worthy of a roughing penalty to Scotty would be swinging his arm at Crosby’s head on the way down. Because I hate to subscribe to the same conspiracy theories that many others do, I’m assuming that the refs are so on edge because of the new hits to the head rules that they will call anything that looks like intentional smash to the head, especially from a guy known for toeing the line when it comes to agitation. I don’t necessarily think it was a penalty, I’m just trying to imagine the ref’s thinking without assuming it was “SID SID SID SID SID SID SID SID.”
by Hatt the Moople on Mar 27, 2010 11:21 PM EDT up reply actions
Unless its a stick to Giroux’s head… then it goes uncalled.
And what’s the common thread here? Hmmm.
I suppose it’s the conspiracy theory again? It’s not like the only missed calls in the game were against the Penguins…
by Hatt the Moople on Mar 28, 2010 10:50 AM EDT up reply actions
Don’t forget the phantom calls. They also went the Penguins way.
You know, like when Crosby is the third man in, and doesn’t get penalized. Malkin doesn’t tie down his jersey and instigates a fight, but doesn’t get a penalty.
Leino gets tripped into a Fleury outside the crease, the play comes back. But twice last playoffs Crosby crashes into Marty Biron IN THE CREASE, and those are good goals.
It’s a fucking joke and the only people who don’t acknowledge it are, surprise surprise, retards from Pittsburgh like you.
Thanks. I remember what you are talking about. It is amazing that fans of teams all over acknowledge that the Pen’s get special treatment but Pen’s fans. But like I said yesterday, most of them weren’t fan’s five years ago when they were one of the leagues worst and not benefiting from phantom calls or flat our incorrect calls as they do now.
It looks like somebody has their tin foil hat on. What about when Hartnell carried his broken stick yesterday for five seconds after it broke? Evgeni Malkin was penalized for that in the past. Or the blatant hook on Cooke just before the Penguins’ third goal? You cried earlier that Cooke held the stick, well how do you suppose the stick got under his arm anyway? Or the weak hooking calls on Sergei Gonchar in the third period three games in a row back in January? Or the high stick Craig Adams took in the first round of the playoffs from Aaron Asham that busted him open but went uncalled? Or the high stick Sidney Crosby took from Darian Hatcher that knocked his teeth out and went uncalled?
My point is, every team faces missed calls, just like every team faces phantom calls. Fortunately, not every fan whines and cries about them like you do. Not every game will be called your way. It is up to your team to play good enough to win regardless of which way the refs call the game. Drop your conspiracy theories, stop crying, and maybe hold your team accountable for their play. Why don’t you blame Laperriere for being minus three? Why don’t you blame Boucher for sustaining a shining 0.714 save percentage in the third period? Or blame Chris Pronger for being next to invisible out there? Or blame the PP unit for going 0-5 on the power play? Or is it easier to say that Bettman doesn’t want you to win and fixes the games against you, and call anyone who approaches the topic rationally a retard?
by Hatt the Moople on Mar 28, 2010 12:42 PM EDT up reply actions
I will give you a tin foil hat scenario. Now work with me here for a minute. The hit Richards put on Booth and the hit Cooke put on Savard were essentially the exact same hit. Do you agree with this premise? Neither man was suspended and under the rules at the time of the hits should have been. Right?
Just Call Me "M"!
Since you are not paying attention I will assume for the commentary that you agree with the above because the facts are indisputable. Now tell me why after each hit, as similar as they were, did Richards receive 17 minute of penalties and the game while Cooke none? None! There is a tin foil hat for you. I am not sure how old you are and if you even know the history of the league and the Flyers but I have been around a long time and have seen my fill of really weird shit. Way to many incidents to call them a matter of coincidence. I don’t think there is a league newsletter that is pushes an anti Flyers agenda, but I think going into every game officials have a pre disposed opinion that the Flyers are the bad boys and they aren’t going to get the benefit of anything. And this just a sub conscience reality.
Just Call Me "M"!
Referees are human. Even though they’re not supossed to, many refs have different ideas of what a penalty is. The ref of the Philly-Florida game obviously thought that Richards’ hit to the head was penalty worthy, while the ref of the Boston-Pittsburgh game didn’t think the Cooke hit was penalty worthy. I don’t see how two calls in two different games by two different referees is evidence of a conspiracy.
To be honest, I thought the Cooke hit was worse than Richards’ and was worth a suspension, though I understand why the league didn’t suspend him.
by Hatt the Moople on Mar 28, 2010 1:19 PM EDT up reply actions
He wasn’t suspended because Richards wasn’t suspended.
by Hatt the Moople on Mar 28, 2010 1:23 PM EDT up reply actions
He wasn’t asking about the suspension, or lack there of. He was asking why Richards received 17 minutes of penalties and Cooke received none.
His quote from my post references the suspension not the penalties. I thought I already explained the penalties. Different refs in different games, seeing different angles of the hit.
by Hatt the Moople on Mar 28, 2010 1:26 PM EDT up reply actions
Sure is, because he’s a Penguins fan. They have no problem with the stunning inconsistencies applied via Rule 87(b) and anyone who does have a problem obviously isn’t logical!
Slurp slurp slurp.
Over 82 games in a season, it evens out. There’s no way to avoid the human element in the game. It’s not as if there’s enough time to dissect every play in every game to determine who exactly was at fault. These guys make split second decisions all game. There’s no way to expect every one to be exactly right.
by Hatt the Moople on Mar 28, 2010 1:42 PM EDT up reply actions
No, it doesn’t.
It doesn’t even out over the course of a season. It doesn’t even out over the course of a playoff series.
This league paves the way for the Pittsburgh Penguins every single year.
Here’ s the deal. You stop trolling here and go back to your blind circle-jerk of people who think the Penguins are treated fairly.
And when it “evens out” and the Penguins get about 60 games stolen from them based on goals taken off the board for no reason whatsoever, or goals allowed against them despite indefendible interference on the goaltender, then you can come back here and post.
Until then, get the fuck out.
The Penguins are the eighth worst team in the league for PIM/game and have had four less power play opportunities (and one less game) this year than the Flyers have had. You’re seeing what you want to see. It all evens out over the course of the season.
by Hatt the Moople on Mar 28, 2010 3:31 PM EDT up reply actions
The Penguins are the eighth worst team in the league for PIM/gam
And yet somehow only 14th in number of times shorthanded, gee how does that happen? It’s almost like the refs call penalties on Pittsburgh, but then even it up at a disproportionate rate…
You’re seeing what you want to see.
Yep. All of North America sees things with a bias, except for Pittsburgh. Only yinzers can see clearly.
How about legitimate goals that are illegally disallowed + illegal goals that are allowed against ?
Because in the last two season, that total just between the Flyers and Pens is Flyers 4, Pens 0.
It all evens out over the course of the season.
Spare us the assinine cliches. Its the crutch of the simple-minded.
The Pens have ten misconducts, that probably has something to do with how that happens. And, if there really was a conspiracy out there for the Pens, it’s doing a pretty poor job if the Penguins are right in the center of the league for times shorthanded, and receive approximately the same number of power plays as the Flyers, who, according to you, are hated by the league. People might lie, but the numbers don’t.
As for disallowed goals, find some unbiased statistics that back up your point. Of course you think legal goals were disallowed and illegal goals are allowed, but you’re hardly a beacon of inobjectivity.
by Hatt the Moople on Mar 28, 2010 4:16 PM EDT up reply actions
Which is why there are rules…because allowing people to decide based on their own discretion does not work. But the ref’s did not follow the rules. In fact, did things that completely contradict the rules.
I think its been said but they are not supposed to be human they are supposed to handle their business with cold logic based on the rule book which is given to them to study as a prerequisite for their position as a referee. That would be like an account making his deductions up because he isn’t going to be just like all the other accountants.
Just Call Me "M"!
You call it a tin foil hat, I call it observation and conversation with fan’s of other teams. Including Devils fans who were on this board during yesterday’s game thread and acknowledged the ridiculousness of yesterday’s calls.
You ask about how Matt Cooke could have a hold of a stick…because they were fighting for positioning, Cooke was on the outside and he wrapped his arm around the guys stick and took it out of his hand. Which was then followed by Bartulius being crossed checked in front of the Flyers goal which allowed the Pen’s to score.
The disallowed goal is another example of pro Pen’s officiating.
How about MAF blatantly throwing his stick at Girioux on the break away? Not only did they call for a penalty shot, they called nothing at all.
I said repeatedly yesterday that the Flyers did not deserve to win that game. The did not play well enough to win that game. But they deserved a chance, and a chance is exactly what the ref’s robbed them of.
So everyone agrees that the reffing is atrocious in one game, and that means that there is a conspiracy against the Flyers? Reffing’s never perfect, it just happened that on this one day, all the questionable calls went the same way. That’s it.
by Hatt the Moople on Mar 28, 2010 1:28 PM EDT up reply actions
Look at the Ottawa game from a few nights ago and you’ll see why we’re furious.
Broad Street Hockey - SBN's Philadelphia Flyers blog. Got goaltending? Searching since 1987.
by Travis Hughes on Mar 28, 2010 2:13 PM EDT up reply actions
What about when Hartnell carried his broken stick yesterday for five seconds after it broke?
What fantasy land was that in? If you watch the replay, later in the sequence the puck hits his stick at the blue line. About five feet away from where it broke.
But, even if your made up story were true, it’s only a penalty if you try to play with a broken stick. Hartnell skated directly to the bench and got a new one, therefore he never “participated in the game” with a broken stick.
A player whose stick is broken may participate in the game provided he drops the broken stick.
Or the blatant hook on Cooke just before the Penguins’ third goal?
By the invisible man?? Parent let go of his stick and glove and it stayed there for three seconds. That’s called “holding the stick” on Cooke. But Rule 87(b)
Why don’t you blame Laperriere for being minus three? Why don’t you blame Boucher for sustaining a shining 0.714 save percentage in the third period? Or blame Chris Pronger for being next to invisible out there?
Hey, thanks for proving you don’t understand hockey at all.
Now stop trolling and go back to your little website and continue your delusions of equality. Just close your eyes and repeat after me “The rest of North America is wrong. The rest of North America is wrong. The rest of North America is wrong….”
by MarioD on Mar 28, 2010 12:50 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
The same stick incident happened in a game with Malkin and he was penalized. If you watch Scotty, he gets up, hangs on to his stick, skates a bit, and drops it. No call was made, though in previous games it was made against the Penguins.
Parent hooked Cooke blatantly before the hold. The stick was horizontal across Cooke’s body before he held it. Sure, it was holding the stick, but the Flyers had gotten away with one immediately before.
And, I guess you’re right. Bettman must have a conspiracy in place. Forget the fact that every single referee would have to be kept secret, as well as several members of the NHL front office. I’m sure he would take the chance knowing that if a single disgruntled ref was to say something, it would give the league a black eye worse than the lockout…
by Hatt the Moople on Mar 28, 2010 1:33 PM EDT up reply actions
If you watch Scotty, he gets up, hangs on to his stick, skates a bit, and drops it.
Which, of course, would mean he did NOT participate in the play and therefore did nothing wrong.
But I suppose if you watch Penguins games regularly, it would be confusing to see an opponent not penalized for doing legal things.
to clarify-were not calling it a calling it a conspiracy but it has become blatently obvious that certain teams (penguins) are treated with favoritism, almost every other fan base on north america recognizes it except for penguins fans.
by flyersfangiroux on Mar 28, 2010 2:11 PM EDT up reply actions
dude your proving our point because our season is essentially done so why would youy even be here if some thing didn’t feel right. We might as well have Barney on ludes in goal and Carter’s gone. What are you scared that were gonna make some run. And futhermore we acquiesced to your team’s superiority. Some even went as far to qualify their statements to that effect like, " i don’t think we would have won have won but nonetheless.." And no one says that the NHL has some conspiracy to fix games for the Pens. but the preferencial treatment of one star player which is not unusal in pro sports should not extend to the entire team. In this instance it did.
Goalies
Boucher did give up a couple softies last game and then today but before then it was on the team not him, he and Leighton have had little support offensively since the olympics ended and Boucher continues to be benched in favor of others simply because the team in front of him can’t score. Look at his losses, most of them are games where he gave up 1 or 2 goals. You should be able to give up that amount and win in the NHL now.
Worst part
Not only did we have to watch that horrible display of officiating, but the bow on top was having to watch it on the Pittsburgh feed. Those two douche bag guys that work the Penguins games are some of the most ridiculous, ignorant and downright moronic pair of sportscasters I’ve ever heard. The only prerequisite for those two must’ve been an unparalleled knowledge of how to slurp Crosby and complain about anything and everything that happens on the ice that is not in the Penguins favor. Absolutely disgraceful.
holmgren needs to go
stop crying in your beers like a bunch of babies. …calling sid a baby, criticizing the announcers, blaming the refs.. must be flyers fans….suck it up and realize until holmgren changes the entire philosophy behind this team, that we will not win more than a playoff round or 2. where the hell was briere today? did he play? which line was he on? maybe next we can trade carter and JVR for chris chelios and phil housley. holmgren is the problem.
by flyers19752008 on Mar 28, 2010 12:53 AM EDT reply actions
Just watched the game on my DVR. Was out drinking yesterday, was going to watch it when I got home. Thank god I passed out because if I would have watched this game while boozed up I would have two broken hands and my dog would be dead.
by Vansteel on Mar 28, 2010 6:41 AM EDT reply actions 1 recs
Friends don’t let friends watch games like that when the outcome and circumstances are already known. You need to really get on your buds for letting watch that game.
Just Call Me "M"!
I’m recently out of a long-term relationship. I wasn’t allowed to have friends, and now it appears they all changed their numbers….anyway, they weren’t hockey fans. Good riddance, I say
Congratulations man! I have been married for ten years and your new independence is going to be the best thing that happened to you brother. Get out there and tackle some drunk bitches.
Just Call Me "M"!
She would say the exact same thing. That is why we are still married. It is mutual misery. I am only kidding but I am assuming you are a youngster so get out there and run through hood rats and slay some hoes first, then settle down.
Just Call Me "M"!
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
SBNation.com Recent Stories
In Association With
Latest Puck Daddy - NHL from Yahoo! Sports
- How Mats Sundin’s no-trade clause controversy made fans reconsider loyalty in NHL
- Nordiques Nation invades Hockey Day in Canada
- Youth hockey coach, parents clash over alleged tirade over 9-year old’s 200th goal puck
- Friday’s Three Stars: Blackhawks lose seventh straight; Wings win nineteenth straight at home
- Puck Previews: Blackhawks reeling; Sabres streaking; Holmstrom’s 1000th game
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
