PASabreFan
-
Posts
44,097 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by PASabreFan
-
-
I will be there--in the goal review room--in March. I cannot wait. And I will report back.
You cereal?
-
From what I understand every goal is reviewed. For scoring as well as determining if it is a legal goal.
as you so eloquently stated who knows what the rules are anymore. Tomato tomatoe let's call the whole thing off!
Yeah, but I'm wondering how they decide which calls go to Toronto. Or do they all?
-
Forgot to ask. Does anyone know when calls go to Toronto, versus being decided in the replay booth in the arena?
-
Going back to Swamp's comment about the second goal being kicked in...
I still haven't had a good look at it. But I remembered the Sedin goal in the playoffs last spring that was waived off despite the NHL's Mike Murphy saying afterwards that there "was not a distinct kicking motion."
Murphy explained that a few months before the playoffs, the NHL sent out what amounted to an addendum to the kicking rule, along with DVD examples. The new interpretration rested on the direction and speed of the puck before and after contact with the skate. Distinct kicking motion appeared to be kicked to the curb.
In Sedin's case, he had his right leg outstretched and a centering pass went off his skate, the toe of which appeared to twist slightly to the right with contact with the puck.
Anyway, I thought the new standard might apply to the goal last night, so I went, naturally, to the NHL rule book for 2010-2011. It is unchanged from last year. It still refers to "distinct kicking motion," defined as a "pendulum motion" of the leg.
It also still says, "A puck that deflects into the net off an attacking player’s skate who does not use a distinct kicking motion is a legitimate goal. A puck that is directed into the net by an attacking player’s skate shall be a legitimate goal as long as no distinct kicking motion is evident."
Just a long winded way of saying the rule book does not match how this rule is actually being applied on the ice and upstairs/Toronto. Or did the league throw out the previous interpretation while trying to figure out a new one to release in February?
-
Last night was a classic game in the Ruff Era. You could almost put it in a time capsule.
Big expectations coming in, but the team is flat for the first period. Sound familiar?
Watch a puck leak through Ryan Miller.
Get behind 3-0 before you start playing. (And of course fans can point to a suspect call -- even a goal that should have been reviewed, but wasn't.)
Score two goals to get back in the game.
Make a big push at the end to tie the game -- and the goalie is Jacques Plante.
Hit a post in the late going. So tantalizing. Hello James Patrick!
Here's the coup de grace. Seven seconds left. Timeout, Buffalo. Lindy gets the white board out.
The twisted knife is all that's missing. Sabres win the faceoff, the other team grabs the puck and flicks it into the empty net -- splitting the uprights.
Lather, rinse and repeat.
-
Every goal is reviewed in the booth. If the Video Judge sees something he can have the referees notified.
Yep. At least that's how the NHL says it's supposed to work:
39.2 Goals – Every goal is to be reviewed by the Video Goal Judge.
Upon making contact with the off-ice official at ice level, the Video
Goal Judge should say initially that he is “looking at the play”. If there
is a need to delay the resumption of the play, the off-ice official at ice
level should signal one of the Referees to delay the center ice face-off
for a moment. Once the Video Goal Judge has reviewed the video
and confirmed that the goal is valid, he should say that “it is a good
goal”. The off-ice official will then signal to the Referee to resume play.
If there is a need to expand the review, the Video Goal Judge will
advise the off-ice official at ice level and the Public Address
Announcer that the “play is under review”. Once the play has been
reviewed and deemed a goal, the goal will be announced in the
normal manner. If the review reveals that the goal must be disallowed,
the Public Address Announcer shall announce the reason for the
disallowed goal as reported by the Referee.
When the Video Goal Judge observes an incident involving a
potential goal that was undetected by the on-ice officials he will
contact the Referee at the first stoppage of play and inform him that a
review of the play is in progress.
When a review is requested by either the Referee or Video Goal
Judge, the Public Address Announcer shall make the following
announcement: "The play is under review".
-
Way too much optimism flowing in this thread.
Bottom line is that the team didn't show up at the start of the game, and it affected the final outcome: a regulation loss.
Same will be said about the season. Team fails to show up in the first quarter of the season (only 3 regulation wins in 20 tries, with the last regulation win almost a full month ago), and it will likely affect the final outcome: no playoffs.
They had a helluva streak like that in January-February last season.
-
Rick said if Miller had lost his mask, play would have been called immediately.
Not necessarily.
"When a goalkeeper has lost his helmet and/or face mask and his
team has possession of the puck, the play shall be stopped
immediately to allow the goalkeeper the opportunity to regain his
helmet and/or face mask. When the opposing team has possession of
the puck, play shall only be stopped if there is no immediate and
impending scoring opportunity. This stoppage of play must be made
by the Referee."
-
Every time RJ says Neuvirth's name, I hear "Nordberg." I keep expecting OJ Simpson to get hit by a car or something.
I have no clue... but I laughed out loud.
-
No kidding! There was nothing Neuvirth could have done on Roy's goal? How about "catch it"
Rick and Harry are masters of that one, too.
Harry STILL doesn't know what "win a period, win a game" means!
-
That second goal was kicked in. It should have been reviewed. Not saying it would have come off the board but they should have at least looked at it.
Every goal is reviewed. Seriously. I totally missed that one.
-
Again with the "ownership changeS" (said Kevin) when heaping praise on Lindy and Darcy. I don't get it.
-
Final minute, there was a faceoff in the Buffalo end. Gaustad skated over to Ellis and Ellis skated in to take the draw. But he appeared to deliberately get himself thrown out, bringing in Gaustad.
Any theories on what that was all about?
-
Just got a call from Uncle Vito. He said it's over by 7:40 and the frog finishes the game for Miller.
I always listen to Vito.
2-0 Caps at 7:40 p.m. Amazing!
-
Again I say. Washington, Schmashington.
-
You should use the one I took while in PA.
ha
I do have nice hammies.
-
I checked the Directv listings and the Sabres-Caps game is not showing up on CI, VS or NHL Network. Not a good sign. I will tune into MSG (yes, it usually works here in Texas), cross my fingers, and see what comes on. It does say something about the Sabres-Caps game tonight (Upcoming) but that doesn't mean it will be shown; it might be blacked out. Anyway, I'll try 638 and 215 and see if it comes up there.
Nice picture. I think more folks should follow our lead and use their real pics as their avatars.
-
Pommers led the team in playoff points last year, tied with Ennis. Other guys 'disappeared' a lot more than him.
Nfreeman, you want him to do 25 goals in 82 games right? or score in 30% of the time right? And continue into the playoffs, right?
Last year playoffs he scored 2 goals in six games. I'm sure you can divide 2 by 6.
i :wub: u
-
We've all ragged on the musical selection at the arena, but you've gotta admit -- playing "How you like me now?" after Myers' goal was pretty awesome. Really wish the broadcast would stick around a little longer before handing it off to Kevin.
-
I hope they're all starting to get it. It's good to see the emotion from this team over the last couple games. Next step: consistency
Vanek will be the one to watch, for postpartum depression. What if drives the team bus into a lake? OK, on second thought, not really funny.
-
I bet Lindy had nothing to do with putting this line together either, right PA?
Jack Adams, here he comes again.
-
That line is really good right now. I think Ennis is now #2 in rookie scoring -- and on the top line of a division winner to boot.
That's a pretty bold prediction! I admire your guts.
-
Pommer: 10 games, 1G, 1A, -7, $5.3MM Hecht: 19 games, 1G, 3A, -4, $3.525MM
TC: 19 games, 4G, 6A, -7, $4.5MM
I'll say it again: Pommer's contract is the worst mistake Darcy's ever made (if you assume that Black Sunday wasn't his doing).
PK, with and without Pominville, is a pretty huge statement of his value. Relax, it's not your money.
-
Wow, Vanek. Even the play he made on the game winner was awesome. I don't know if he got the assist on it because he didn't touch the puck but, he should have. The Canucks Dman had position and Vanek actually stuck his stick between the defenders legs to clip his stick, creating that bad pass that Myers could pick up. Great game.
Good description!
GAME DISCUSSION THREAD
in 2010/2011 Season
Posted
You just going to drop that tidbit and not give details?
You're not in the mood?! You get in the mood!