On April 17 2016 18:00 Blisse wrote: I like the Blues and Rangers so I am definitely biased, but it happened again today where the Ranger's goal was challenged and almost ruled offside for something that would've been like an inch off.
Like I get calling blatant offsides when refs just fail to look at the puck, but like it's literally an inch. Either have more accurate and high resolution cameras do the detection like tennis does, or make it lenient - if it's pretty much onside then it's onside. Some guy compiled a bunch of owner's comments and they all agreed that the challenge should only be used for blatant plays, not these close ones.
It's just a bummer because instead of cheering for a goal for or against, I have to spend a couple minutes anxiously waiting for someone to make sure it's a good goal. I bit against the spirit of the game I think.
===
someone said that rangers are using the IR excuse to intentionally scratch Girardi XD
I never really understood against the spirit of the game claims. Would much prefer to get it right, and a lot of those calls are very hard to make.
I will go on the record that I'm cheering for Washington and Florida this year as I have no Canadian team to Bandwagon on to. But I feel that the only 2 teams in the playoffs this year that can win a Cup are Chicago or LA. I hope I'm proven wrong!
On April 17 2016 18:00 Blisse wrote: I like the Blues and Rangers so I am definitely biased, but it happened again today where the Ranger's goal was challenged and almost ruled offside for something that would've been like an inch off.
Like I get calling blatant offsides when refs just fail to look at the puck, but like it's literally an inch. Either have more accurate and high resolution cameras do the detection like tennis does, or make it lenient - if it's pretty much onside then it's onside. Some guy compiled a bunch of owner's comments and they all agreed that the challenge should only be used for blatant plays, not these close ones.
It's just a bummer because instead of cheering for a goal for or against, I have to spend a couple minutes anxiously waiting for someone to make sure it's a good goal. I bit against the spirit of the game I think.
===
someone said that rangers are using the IR excuse to intentionally scratch Girardi XD
I never really understood against the spirit of the game claims. Would much prefer to get it right, and a lot of those calls are very hard to make.
Not like they even do get it right with challenges/review. the Roussel goal in game 2 of stars vs wild was so called a no goal on the ice, and yet they overturned it despite it clearly going in the net under a dislodged crossbar. made no sense whatsoever.
On April 17 2016 18:00 Blisse wrote: I like the Blues and Rangers so I am definitely biased, but it happened again today where the Ranger's goal was challenged and almost ruled offside for something that would've been like an inch off.
Like I get calling blatant offsides when refs just fail to look at the puck, but like it's literally an inch. Either have more accurate and high resolution cameras do the detection like tennis does, or make it lenient - if it's pretty much onside then it's onside. Some guy compiled a bunch of owner's comments and they all agreed that the challenge should only be used for blatant plays, not these close ones.
It's just a bummer because instead of cheering for a goal for or against, I have to spend a couple minutes anxiously waiting for someone to make sure it's a good goal. I bit against the spirit of the game I think.
===
someone said that rangers are using the IR excuse to intentionally scratch Girardi XD
I never really understood against the spirit of the game claims. Would much prefer to get it right, and a lot of those calls are very hard to make.
Not like they even do get it right with challenges/review. the Roussel goal in game 2 of stars vs wild was called a no goal on the ice, and yet they overturned it despite it clearly going in the net under a dislodged crossbar. made no sense whatsoever.
On April 17 2016 18:00 Blisse wrote: I like the Blues and Rangers so I am definitely biased, but it happened again today where the Ranger's goal was challenged and almost ruled offside for something that would've been like an inch off.
Like I get calling blatant offsides when refs just fail to look at the puck, but like it's literally an inch. Either have more accurate and high resolution cameras do the detection like tennis does, or make it lenient - if it's pretty much onside then it's onside. Some guy compiled a bunch of owner's comments and they all agreed that the challenge should only be used for blatant plays, not these close ones.
It's just a bummer because instead of cheering for a goal for or against, I have to spend a couple minutes anxiously waiting for someone to make sure it's a good goal. I bit against the spirit of the game I think.
===
someone said that rangers are using the IR excuse to intentionally scratch Girardi XD
I never really understood against the spirit of the game claims. Would much prefer to get it right, and a lot of those calls are very hard to make.
Not like they even do get it right with challenges/review. the Roussel goal in game 2 of stars vs wild was so called a no goal on the ice, and yet they overturned it despite it clearly going in the net under a dislodged crossbar. made no sense whatsoever.
Except for the whole part where the net wasn't dislodged... you know minor detail and all.
On April 17 2016 18:00 Blisse wrote: I like the Blues and Rangers so I am definitely biased, but it happened again today where the Ranger's goal was challenged and almost ruled offside for something that would've been like an inch off.
Like I get calling blatant offsides when refs just fail to look at the puck, but like it's literally an inch. Either have more accurate and high resolution cameras do the detection like tennis does, or make it lenient - if it's pretty much onside then it's onside. Some guy compiled a bunch of owner's comments and they all agreed that the challenge should only be used for blatant plays, not these close ones.
It's just a bummer because instead of cheering for a goal for or against, I have to spend a couple minutes anxiously waiting for someone to make sure it's a good goal. I bit against the spirit of the game I think.
===
someone said that rangers are using the IR excuse to intentionally scratch Girardi XD
I never really understood against the spirit of the game claims. Would much prefer to get it right, and a lot of those calls are very hard to make.
Not like they even do get it right with challenges/review. the Roussel goal in game 2 of stars vs wild was so called a no goal on the ice, and yet they overturned it despite it clearly going in the net under a dislodged crossbar. made no sense whatsoever.
Except for the whole part where the net wasn't dislodged... you know minor detail and all.
Problem with the Challenge is that the Refs are both inconsistent and can't even get the call right despite using replays. How many times during the season did we have goalie interference despite massive evidence showing the offensive player being pushed into the goalie? The Challenge is really a shitshow thats more of a "can we get the refs to call something on this play we fucked up on" more than its challenging something worth challenging. We've for sure had 1 challenge this post-season absolutely change the tempo of a game. How many more will happen?
On April 17 2016 18:00 Blisse wrote: I like the Blues and Rangers so I am definitely biased, but it happened again today where the Ranger's goal was challenged and almost ruled offside for something that would've been like an inch off.
Like I get calling blatant offsides when refs just fail to look at the puck, but like it's literally an inch. Either have more accurate and high resolution cameras do the detection like tennis does, or make it lenient - if it's pretty much onside then it's onside. Some guy compiled a bunch of owner's comments and they all agreed that the challenge should only be used for blatant plays, not these close ones.
It's just a bummer because instead of cheering for a goal for or against, I have to spend a couple minutes anxiously waiting for someone to make sure it's a good goal. I bit against the spirit of the game I think.
===
someone said that rangers are using the IR excuse to intentionally scratch Girardi XD
I never really understood against the spirit of the game claims. Would much prefer to get it right, and a lot of those calls are very hard to make.
Not like they even do get it right with challenges/review. the Roussel goal in game 2 of stars vs wild was so called a no goal on the ice, and yet they overturned it despite it clearly going in the net under a dislodged crossbar. made no sense whatsoever.
Except for the whole part where the net wasn't dislodged... you know minor detail and all.
Problem with the Challenge is that the Refs are both inconsistent and can't even get the call right despite using replays. How many times during the season did we have goalie interference despite massive evidence showing the offensive player being pushed into the goalie? The Challenge is really a shitshow thats more of a "can we get the refs to call something on this play we fucked up on" more than its challenging something worth challenging. We've for sure had 1 challenge this post-season absolutely change the tempo of a game. How many more will happen?
I don't think the Refs are inconsistent or bad, in fact they are some of the best the world has to offer. The problem lies within the rules that are open to interpretation. When such rules exist, there's always going to be disagreement, no matter how qualified your refs are. On top of that the two teams and the fans are constantly going to be at each other's throats, because they will both have a valid interpretation that supports their case.
There are so many rules when the referee has to judge a player's intentions it's laughable. Prime example would be the Dallas Stars vs. Minessota Wild game 2, where Roussel kicks the puck onto the goalkeepers back and into the net from BEHIND the net! Is it apparent from his motions he was actually just trying to handle the puck and play it? Yes, it is. So under the current rules the goal is legal, if we put aside the whole notion that players can simulate and pretend things are not intentional via their body language, even though they are in fact intentional. Competitive players at the highest level wouldn't do such a thing to gain an edge right, or would they? Additionally, no matter how you look at the replay it just bloody looks like this is soccer, not ice hockey. Sure pucks can deflect of people's bodies and skates and be legal goals, but this one in particular just screams at me, that it's not hockey, what a ridiculous goal. The solution is to make rules clear and not open to interpretation. If a goal comes of an attacking player's skate blade just disallow it and to hell with intentionality and distinct kicking motions. We may have less goals, but at least the rules will be clear and not open to interpretation.
On April 17 2016 18:00 Blisse wrote: I like the Blues and Rangers so I am definitely biased, but it happened again today where the Ranger's goal was challenged and almost ruled offside for something that would've been like an inch off.
Like I get calling blatant offsides when refs just fail to look at the puck, but like it's literally an inch. Either have more accurate and high resolution cameras do the detection like tennis does, or make it lenient - if it's pretty much onside then it's onside. Some guy compiled a bunch of owner's comments and they all agreed that the challenge should only be used for blatant plays, not these close ones.
It's just a bummer because instead of cheering for a goal for or against, I have to spend a couple minutes anxiously waiting for someone to make sure it's a good goal. I bit against the spirit of the game I think.
===
someone said that rangers are using the IR excuse to intentionally scratch Girardi XD
I never really understood against the spirit of the game claims. Would much prefer to get it right, and a lot of those calls are very hard to make.
I don't think he means that checking the replay for rule legality and making sure to get it right is against the spirit of the game, that's fine. What's against the spirit of the game are the constant interruptions to play it causes, therefore the rules need to be more lenient, so that we don't have a 5 minute investigation on each 3rd goal.
On April 17 2016 18:00 Blisse wrote: I like the Blues and Rangers so I am definitely biased, but it happened again today where the Ranger's goal was challenged and almost ruled offside for something that would've been like an inch off.
Like I get calling blatant offsides when refs just fail to look at the puck, but like it's literally an inch. Either have more accurate and high resolution cameras do the detection like tennis does, or make it lenient - if it's pretty much onside then it's onside. Some guy compiled a bunch of owner's comments and they all agreed that the challenge should only be used for blatant plays, not these close ones.
It's just a bummer because instead of cheering for a goal for or against, I have to spend a couple minutes anxiously waiting for someone to make sure it's a good goal. I bit against the spirit of the game I think.
===
someone said that rangers are using the IR excuse to intentionally scratch Girardi XD
I never really understood against the spirit of the game claims. Would much prefer to get it right, and a lot of those calls are very hard to make.
Not like they even do get it right with challenges/review. the Roussel goal in game 2 of stars vs wild was so called a no goal on the ice, and yet they overturned it despite it clearly going in the net under a dislodged crossbar. made no sense whatsoever.
Except for the whole part where the net wasn't dislodged... you know minor detail and all.
Problem with the Challenge is that the Refs are both inconsistent and can't even get the call right despite using replays. How many times during the season did we have goalie interference despite massive evidence showing the offensive player being pushed into the goalie? The Challenge is really a shitshow thats more of a "can we get the refs to call something on this play we fucked up on" more than its challenging something worth challenging. We've for sure had 1 challenge this post-season absolutely change the tempo of a game. How many more will happen?
I don't think the Refs are inconsistent or bad, in fact they are some of the best the world has to offer. The problem lies within the rules that are open to interpretation. When such rules exist, there's always going to be disagreement, no matter how qualified your refs are. On top of that the two teams and the fans are constantly going to be at each other's throats, because they will both have a valid interpretation that supports their case.
There are so many rules when the referee has to judge a player's intentions it's laughable. Prime example would be the Dallas Stars vs. Minessota Wild game 2, where Roussel kicks the puck onto the goalkeepers back and into the net from BEHIND the net! Is it apparent from his motions he was actually just trying to handle the puck and play it? Yes, it is. So under the current rules the goal is legal, if we put aside the whole notion that players can simulate and pretend things are not intentional via their body language, even though they are in fact intentional. Competitive players at the highest level wouldn't do such a thing to gain an edge right, or would they? Additionally, no matter how you look at the replay it just bloody looks like this is soccer, not ice hockey. Sure pucks can deflect of people's bodies and skates and be legal goals, but this one in particular just screams at me, that it's not hockey, what a ridiculous goal. The solution is to make rules clear and not open to interpretation. If a goal comes of an attacking player's skate blade just disallow it and to hell with intentionality and distinct kicking motions. We may have less goals, but at least the rules will be clear and not open to interpretation.
On April 17 2016 18:00 Blisse wrote: I like the Blues and Rangers so I am definitely biased, but it happened again today where the Ranger's goal was challenged and almost ruled offside for something that would've been like an inch off.
Like I get calling blatant offsides when refs just fail to look at the puck, but like it's literally an inch. Either have more accurate and high resolution cameras do the detection like tennis does, or make it lenient - if it's pretty much onside then it's onside. Some guy compiled a bunch of owner's comments and they all agreed that the challenge should only be used for blatant plays, not these close ones.
It's just a bummer because instead of cheering for a goal for or against, I have to spend a couple minutes anxiously waiting for someone to make sure it's a good goal. I bit against the spirit of the game I think.
===
someone said that rangers are using the IR excuse to intentionally scratch Girardi XD
I never really understood against the spirit of the game claims. Would much prefer to get it right, and a lot of those calls are very hard to make.
I don't think he means that checking the replay for rule legality and making sure to get it right is against the spirit of the game, that's fine. What's against the spirit of the game are the constant interruptions to play it causes, therefore the rules need to be more lenient, so that we don't have a 5 minute investigation on each 3rd goal.
Refs have been horribly inconsistent this year with reviews involving Goalie Interference. The rules are very clear that there cannot be interference called on a play where the defenseman pushes the offensive player into the goalie and yet there have been at least a dozen times that I can think of at the least where that happened and interference was called regardless. It got to a point near the last third or so of the season there was a consistent amount of it going on clearly on purpose trying to fish for the interference call. There's room for interpretation but when there's clearly defined rules on a call and half the time they're followed and half the time they aren't isn't interpretation its straight up inconsistency.
On April 17 2016 18:00 Blisse wrote: I like the Blues and Rangers so I am definitely biased, but it happened again today where the Ranger's goal was challenged and almost ruled offside for something that would've been like an inch off.
Like I get calling blatant offsides when refs just fail to look at the puck, but like it's literally an inch. Either have more accurate and high resolution cameras do the detection like tennis does, or make it lenient - if it's pretty much onside then it's onside. Some guy compiled a bunch of owner's comments and they all agreed that the challenge should only be used for blatant plays, not these close ones.
It's just a bummer because instead of cheering for a goal for or against, I have to spend a couple minutes anxiously waiting for someone to make sure it's a good goal. I bit against the spirit of the game I think.
===
someone said that rangers are using the IR excuse to intentionally scratch Girardi XD
I never really understood against the spirit of the game claims. Would much prefer to get it right, and a lot of those calls are very hard to make.
Not like they even do get it right with challenges/review. the Roussel goal in game 2 of stars vs wild was so called a no goal on the ice, and yet they overturned it despite it clearly going in the net under a dislodged crossbar. made no sense whatsoever.
Except for the whole part where the net wasn't dislodged... you know minor detail and all.
Problem with the Challenge is that the Refs are both inconsistent and can't even get the call right despite using replays. How many times during the season did we have goalie interference despite massive evidence showing the offensive player being pushed into the goalie? The Challenge is really a shitshow thats more of a "can we get the refs to call something on this play we fucked up on" more than its challenging something worth challenging. We've for sure had 1 challenge this post-season absolutely change the tempo of a game. How many more will happen?
I don't think the Refs are inconsistent or bad, in fact they are some of the best the world has to offer. The problem lies within the rules that are open to interpretation. When such rules exist, there's always going to be disagreement, no matter how qualified your refs are. On top of that the two teams and the fans are constantly going to be at each other's throats, because they will both have a valid interpretation that supports their case.
There are so many rules when the referee has to judge a player's intentions it's laughable. Prime example would be the Dallas Stars vs. Minessota Wild game 2, where Roussel kicks the puck onto the goalkeepers back and into the net from BEHIND the net! Is it apparent from his motions he was actually just trying to handle the puck and play it? Yes, it is. So under the current rules the goal is legal, if we put aside the whole notion that players can simulate and pretend things are not intentional via their body language, even though they are in fact intentional. Competitive players at the highest level wouldn't do such a thing to gain an edge right, or would they? Additionally, no matter how you look at the replay it just bloody looks like this is soccer, not ice hockey. Sure pucks can deflect of people's bodies and skates and be legal goals, but this one in particular just screams at me, that it's not hockey, what a ridiculous goal. The solution is to make rules clear and not open to interpretation. If a goal comes of an attacking player's skate blade just disallow it and to hell with intentionality and distinct kicking motions. We may have less goals, but at least the rules will be clear and not open to interpretation.
On April 18 2016 02:13 QuanticHawk wrote:
On April 17 2016 18:00 Blisse wrote: I like the Blues and Rangers so I am definitely biased, but it happened again today where the Ranger's goal was challenged and almost ruled offside for something that would've been like an inch off.
Like I get calling blatant offsides when refs just fail to look at the puck, but like it's literally an inch. Either have more accurate and high resolution cameras do the detection like tennis does, or make it lenient - if it's pretty much onside then it's onside. Some guy compiled a bunch of owner's comments and they all agreed that the challenge should only be used for blatant plays, not these close ones.
It's just a bummer because instead of cheering for a goal for or against, I have to spend a couple minutes anxiously waiting for someone to make sure it's a good goal. I bit against the spirit of the game I think.
===
someone said that rangers are using the IR excuse to intentionally scratch Girardi XD
I never really understood against the spirit of the game claims. Would much prefer to get it right, and a lot of those calls are very hard to make.
I don't think he means that checking the replay for rule legality and making sure to get it right is against the spirit of the game, that's fine. What's against the spirit of the game are the constant interruptions to play it causes, therefore the rules need to be more lenient, so that we don't have a 5 minute investigation on each 3rd goal.
Refs have been horribly inconsistent this year with reviews involving Goalie Interference. The rules are very clear that there cannot be interference called on a play where the defenseman pushes the offensive player into the goalie and yet there have been at least a dozen times that I can think of at the least where that happened and interference was called regardless. It got to a point near the last third or so of the season there was a consistent amount of it going on clearly on purpose trying to fish for the interference call. There's room for interpretation but when there's clearly defined rules on a call and half the time they're followed and half the time they aren't isn't interpretation its straight up inconsistency.
Sure, there were a bunch of bad and inconsistent calls. That doesn't take away from the fact that rules should be simple and not open to interpretation, because then the human error of referees is way multiplied by the systematic errors originating from the system. How do you draw the line between the offensive player being pushed into the goalie, and the offensive player pretending to be pushed in order to interfere with the goalie? The offensive player can even hit against the defenseman signalling that he wants to get away and then pretend to be bumped back onto the goalie. How does a referee see that and read the players intentions? These rules are open to interpretation and highly sensitive to human error, so effectively, they are bad rules.
What I am saying is that when a ref makes a mistake it should be crystal clear he made a mistake when the decision is reviewed. There shouldn't be a number of competing and equally valid interpretations of the same events on the ice, because these rules should when at all possible be defined by physical events and boundaries and not by players' intentions where the referee has to read their body language and minds to make the correct call. Yes, there will be situations that are impossible to define physically, but they should be kept at a minimum, which currently is not the case at all.
On April 22 2016 05:24 JimmiC wrote: I think the sharks are putting it together this year. or maybe its hope. Either way I would love to see thorton win, one of the good guys in hockey and so underrated.
On paper, this is the best Sharks team that they have iced since 2009. They have a legit top line, two excellent #1 d-men (Burns and Vlasic), a solid goalie, and plenty of depth at all positions. I am also very pleasantly surprised at how good of a coach DeBoer is, which is directly translating into how good the power play looks. That said, I am continually bothered (as are Sharks fans in general) at how some of the prominent Sharks keep getting rubbed out on the score sheet -- notably Couture and Marleau. Marleau is playing on the third line, FFS. With his skillset, he should be dominating the ice. Granted, the Kings are unquestionably an elite 5v5 team that can roll four solid lines, but I still feel like the Sharks' 2nd - 4th lines are not playing as well as they should be. The Sharks first line and power play are carrying the team hard. It's also critical that Jones is keeping up with Quick's ridiculously good goaltending in this series.
EPT![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/fYgl3Nr.gif)
