wallybarthman
-
Posts
323 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by wallybarthman
-
-
Nice to see the NHL's outstanding tradition of terrible one-sided officiating is continuing. What a bunch of frekin morons.
-
I'm still trying to figure out where the OBVIOUS FREKIN HOOKING CALL where Ennis got pulled off the puck was? Morons with stripes that's all we've got tonight.
-
In fairness, if you can't score at least three goals you can't blame your goalie.
-
#facepalm
-
Another slash, another no call..... what the heck is going on? These aren't even close calls the Refs are letting go.
-
These Refs blow..... tripping and holding the stick are not against the rules anymore.
-
5 hole goal was weak. Keep the paddle on the ice when sliding over.
Someone in the preseason (Duff, May, Koziol, etc.) said that hardest adjustment for Sabres fans this year was going to be less than outstanding goaltending. That prophecy has come true.
-
Why was that penalty on Girgs not called ?
What penalty? The Refs screwed us on the sequence - there should have been THREE FREKIN CALLS against the Devils before they got that goal.
-
Will somebody PLEASE tell Dunleavy to call a goal when somebody scores a goal?!?!??@!?!@#13/
That's the problem with a guy who is used to doing TV being simulcast on the radio. It's a particular problem with road games because there's no horn or crowd.
-
Right now there are no broadcast plans for any of the Sabres games that have been announced. The ended up streaming the intra-squad scrimmage but they've announced nothing about the pre-season. The catch is that MSG has the rights to broadcast the Sabres, so they can't go ahead and do their own stream like they did for the intra-squad scrimmage.
-
Try craigslist. The pittsburgh craigslist is pretty active.
-
You knew one of those power plays was going to click. Now we need to get out of this period up 2
-
And can we please stop blaming a loss by an 11-17 team on the refs?
So you're saying that they got the call right? That there wasn't interference on the goaltender?
-
Bull $hit! That's not what the rule says!
Here's the rule you posted earlier:
"If an attacking player establishes a significant position within the
goal crease, so as to obstruct the goalkeeper’s vision and impair his
ability to defend his goal, and a goal is scored, the goal will be
disallowed. For this purpose, a player “establishes a significant position within
the crease” when, in the Referee’s judgment, his body, or a
substantial portion thereof, is within the goal crease for more than an
instantaneous period of time."
It doesn't say anything about contact! Now you are playing the contrarian with yourself!
As the rule says - the issue wasn't movement through the crease, it was that a goal was scored and Miller couldn't get position or vision. And I don't think that warranted a penalty - that goal should have been disallowed. If there's contact, that's where the penalty could be called.
-
I missed the game in real time last night (and I'm glad) because the Refs gave the game to Boston in OT - end of story. Even with the reply in slow-motion there is no evidence that Adam made any contact with Savard - even less a high-stick. That was a flop call and it looked like Savard scratched himself on the way to the bench to get the penalty. And the OT winning "GOAL" was a joke - clear interference on Recchi and they let the goal stand. What a joke of a call. Miller knew it and complained about it at the end of the game. Miller stops that shot if he can get into position but because Recchi was in the crease he can't and they score. Nice to see they can use the replay to allow a goal the Refs missed but not to rule it out because of an obvious infraction.
-
In case you missed it:
-
I still want the explanation on how they disallowed Conolly's goal. The call on the ice from the ref was goal and the puck clearly did not go in off of a hand. End of story. There was no whistle for the hand pass and you can't review a hand pass call anyway. Seems very fishy to me.
-
Yep. This was some horrible officiating in the last minute or so.
That's an embarrassment to the league - easily a 5-3 in the last two minutes. I'd love to know why the Refs magically decided to stop calling anything - they certainly changed from the 1st period where Vanek got a hooking call. Refs settled this one as far as I'm concerned.
-
Is anyone else seeing a string of no-calls on Tampa Bay?
-
Well he is definitely not making a case for himself tonight with that last goal...
Pretty crappy call though - on the replay it's pretty clear he had it covered and Hall dug it out from under him.
-
I cannot for the life of me figure out why Vanek never draws a penalty in front of the net. He constantly gets crushed and there's never a call. Makes me furious anytime Myers get called for "Cross checking" when Vanek gets pounded every night.
-
How does he get the penalty out of that. That is crap.
Downie avoided one by keeping his gloves on - my money says Gaustad flattens him tonight.
-
Crap Connolly being careless with the puck at the blueline and ends up in the back of the net.
And then decides not to take his man in the defensive end... why is he not a healthy scratch?
-
Great shot by Thomas Vanek! Way to bounce back from the cheap shot.
Instead of taking a penalty - score a goal. Good plan
Coaches Challenge on Offsides
in The Aud Club
Posted
I think we Sabres fans are very sensitive on this topic as we had two instances in our history where a goal was allowed that should have been (99 vs the Stars) and a goal that wasn't a goal allowed to stand (2000 vs Philly) when it went through the side of the net. So far, it seems that the NHL is only capable of screwing the Sabres over - getting it wrong when it works against us and taking our goals away from us.
The irony is I like the rule. I remember one instance in the 98 run (I think against Washington in the playoffs) where a Capitals player didn't tag up - didn't even come close to it actually and scored. In that case, it wasn't a discretionary call - the linesman just plain missed it. All of our "offsides" this season were so close you can see why the linesman ruled the play on sides because the player's forward momentum carried them into the zone as the puck entered the zone. All three you've needed instant replay AND slow motion to make the "correct" call.
If you watch it at full speed, it's inconclusive (which is what the linesman essentially ruled) and therefore shouldn't be overturned. I know we can't make a rule of not using slow motion for reviewing offsides (and we certainly wouldn't want that rule for goals) but I think it's a valid point that slow motion provides something that the human eye can't and is it worth it for an offsides call that in real time is about .1 second tops.