What's new
By:
USCHO Fan Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.

NHL 2015-16: John Scott for MVP!

Status
Not open for further replies.
Re: NHL 2015-16: John Scott for MVP!

Did Tampa even get off the plane?

I'm cautiously optimistic that the shutout was good for Mrazek's confidence, even if he didn't see much action. Still didn't score more than two goals, so I'm very skeptical.

And of course, Abby getting into it at the buzzer. :rolleyes:
 
Re: NHL 2015-16: John Scott for MVP!

Also, can I just state how horribly designed the NHL website is following the release of their latest revision this past fall? They made it clunkier, slower, and almost nothing about it is intuitive.
 
FadeToBlack&Gold said:
Did Tampa even get off the plane?

I'm cautiously optimistic that the shutout was good for Mrazek's confidence, even if he didn't see much action. Still didn't score more than two goals, so I'm very skeptical.

And of course, Abby getting into it at the buzzer. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

You really couldn't ask for more for Saint Petr's first game back. Sees some action and tough spots but gets a relatively easy game to get back into things.

Detroit probably could have had 4-5 tonight though. They didn't lack for chances, AND played sound defensively.

You gonna be down around here Tuesday?
 
Re: NHL 2015-16: John Scott for MVP!

hockeyplayer1015 said:
You really couldn't ask for more for Saint Petr's first game back. Sees some action and tough spots but gets a relatively easy game to get back into things.

Detroit probably could have had 4-5 tonight though. They didn't lack for chances, AND played sound defensively.

You gonna be down around here Tuesday?
Click to expand...

Yep, Section 121.
 
Re: NHL 2015-16: John Scott for MVP!

Gurtholfin said:
They just wanted to match them up, or rather NOT call that penalty at that point in the game. If it's the first period, Ladd maybe gets a 2 all by himself.
Click to expand...
I certainly agree the refs are pre-disposed to give matching minors, rather than a PP, that late in the game.

That stuff happens around the net on just about every puck freeze and is unlikely to be called in the 3rd period.
Click to expand...
Agree with that as well.

But where I'm differing from both you and Lugnut92 is I thought the roll into Toews' legs, coming from the side, looked both unnecessary and a little dangerous. Maybe I'm just overprotective of the Good Captain. But my thought was the leg roll needed to be called, and the embellishment/cross-check combination gave the refs a reasonable route to matching minors. I'll admit I didn't notice when the arm went up. If the arm went up early, I'm probably wrong.

Game 3
Cashing a couple more of the early chances would have made a world of difference. Let a good team hang around...

... and risk another odd result. Hitchcock emphasized the need to win the 5x5 shifts. Then the Blues PP bags two goals that prove to be the difference. Lots of twists and turns in this series.
 
Re: NHL 2015-16: John Scott for MVP!

pgb-ohio said:
and risk another odd result. Hitchcock emphasized the need to win the 5x5 shifts. Then the Blues PP bags two goals that prove to be the difference. Lots of twists and turns in this series.
Click to expand...

To be fair, the Blues had the only 5x5 goal yesterday. Extended back to Game 1, the Blues have three 5x5 goals to the Hawks' one. I won't go so far as to say that the Blues are running away with the 5x5 play, but they're the ones converting. Hopefully it stays that way! :D
 
Re: NHL 2015-16: John Scott for MVP!

Jimjamesak said:
I mean, given all the rules definitions it was technically a goal.

The fact that Roussel scored it is *ing funny.
Click to expand...

I don't know how anyone can say with a straight face that that was "technically" a goal. He kicked the puck, the puck doesn't fall through the net frame until after the net has been dislodged. The only reason the net gets dislodged is because Dubnyk is trying to press himself against the crossbar to prevent the puck on his back from falling in...he didn't do anything wrong. There is no way in hell that goal should could, especially when the call on the ice was no goal.
 
Re: NHL 2015-16: John Scott for MVP!

Shirtless Guy said:
I don't know how anyone can say with a straight face that that was "technically" a goal. He kicked the puck, the puck doesn't fall through the net frame until after the net has been dislodged. The only reason the net gets dislodged is because Dubnyk is trying to press himself against the crossbar to prevent the puck on his back from falling in...he didn't do anything wrong. There is no way in hell that goal should could, especially when the call on the ice was no goal.
Click to expand...

The explanation was that the net was still on the pegs. They have some sort of rule they cited in the rulebook that if the net isn't "off" the pegs then the goal still counts. And if you watch the video from the side closely the net is on the pegs and the pegs are still in the holes in the ice.

A one in a million goal.
 
Shirtless Guy said:
I don't know how anyone can say with a straight face that that was "technically" a goal. He kicked the puck, the puck doesn't fall through the net frame until after the net has been dislodged. The only reason the net gets dislodged is because Dubnyk is trying to press himself against the crossbar to prevent the puck on his back from falling in...he didn't do anything wrong. There is no way in hell that goal should could, especially when the call on the ice was no goal.
Click to expand...
Given the stances taken on "distinct kicking motion" I'm not surprised they allowed that, I don't like it much myself but it is what is. As for the net, AFAIK if the net is being lifted up like that it doesn't count as being off.
 
Re: NHL 2015-16: John Scott for MVP!

ScoobyDoo said:
The explanation was that the net was still on the pegs. They have some sort of rule they cited in the rulebook that if the net isn't "off" the pegs then the goal still counts. And if you watch the video from the side closely the net is on the pegs and the pegs are still in the holes in the ice.

A one in a million goal.
Click to expand...

when dubnyk moves and the puck finally drops off his back? They mention nothing about kicking, so somehow that wasn't a kicked puck?
 
Re: NHL 2015-16: John Scott for MVP!

Shirtless Guy said:
when dubnyk moves and the puck finally drops off his back? They mention nothing about kicking, so somehow that wasn't a kicked puck?
Click to expand...

Yes, the net wasn't off until after the puck dropped over the line.

Torchetti said at his press conference that the refs reviewed the kicking and determined it wasn't illegal.
 
Re: NHL 2015-16: John Scott for MVP!

when it is being lifted up like that, when is the puck considered across the line? when it crosses the line? even if at that moment, it might be above where the crossbar would be or when it crosses the frame of the net?
 
Re: NHL 2015-16: John Scott for MVP!

Shirtless Guy said:
when it is being lifted up like that, when is the puck considered across the line? when it crosses the line? even if at that moment, it might be above where the crossbar would be or when it crosses the frame of the net?
Click to expand...

I assume that is correct, yes.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top