ROC Sabres Posted February 18, 2009 Report Share Posted February 18, 2009 Gotta review that, thats a goal for pommers! EDIT: Might say he punched it in Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SwampD Posted February 18, 2009 Report Share Posted February 18, 2009 That's a goal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DR HOLLIDAY Posted February 18, 2009 Report Share Posted February 18, 2009 Pommers? 4-0............Damn.......... :beer: :beer: :beer: :beer: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DR HOLLIDAY Posted February 18, 2009 Report Share Posted February 18, 2009 nuts to this turning on dog the bounty hunter :bag: Why would they put Pogge tonight? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jwcolour Posted February 18, 2009 Report Share Posted February 18, 2009 WHAAAT? Thats bogus. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DonInBuffalo Posted February 18, 2009 Report Share Posted February 18, 2009 Apparently during the commericial break somebody told the announcer how to pronounce Gerbe's name. What kind of dweeb would think that's pronounced "Gerb"? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ROC Sabres Posted February 18, 2009 Report Share Posted February 18, 2009 HAHAHAHAHA which is why they need a "war room" that ISN'T in Toronto. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wjag Posted February 18, 2009 Report Share Posted February 18, 2009 Not to be greedy, but that was pure BS.. That was a goal.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DR HOLLIDAY Posted February 18, 2009 Report Share Posted February 18, 2009 He turned his shoulder, more like he was hooked........Brutal....... :thumbdown: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
... Posted February 18, 2009 Report Share Posted February 18, 2009 Waived off because of Pommer's illegal use of The Force. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wacka Posted February 18, 2009 Report Share Posted February 18, 2009 WHAAAT? Thats bogus. BS. He's putting his shoulder in a position to avoid hurting it hitting the goal, and the idiot ref says no goal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
norfend Posted February 18, 2009 Report Share Posted February 18, 2009 I need to see that rule before passing full judgement, but I always thought it was foot or hand, not arm! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DR HOLLIDAY Posted February 18, 2009 Report Share Posted February 18, 2009 Waived off because of Pommer's illegal use of The Force. Damn the force........ :beer: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wacka Posted February 18, 2009 Report Share Posted February 18, 2009 Next time someone is moving towards the net and it bounces off their chest or head and in, they'll say no goal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
norfend Posted February 18, 2009 Report Share Posted February 18, 2009 Damn the force........ :beer: :lol: :lol: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SwampD Posted February 18, 2009 Report Share Posted February 18, 2009 Can't wait to hear what the jackals at intermission say about that. Right before their gay porn segment on Crosby. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ROC Sabres Posted February 18, 2009 Report Share Posted February 18, 2009 I need to see that rule before passing full judgement, but I always thought it was foot or hand, not arm! The rule is, Article 487 section A.: if a questionable goal is scored in Toronto, it counts to the benefits of Toronto. after reading, i saw section b and c Section B: "Unless it is for Sydney Crosby or Alex Ovechkin" Section C: "In the event a questionable goal is scored by Sydney Crosby or Alex Ovechkin in Toronto, we flip a coin and give it to them next time" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
... Posted February 18, 2009 Report Share Posted February 18, 2009 The rule is, Article 487 section A.: if a questionable goal is scored in Toronto, it counts to the benefits of Toronto. after reading, i saw section b and c Section B: "Unless it is for Sydney Crosby or Alex Ovechkin" Section C: "In the event a questionable goal is scored by Sydney Crosby or Alex Ovechkin in Toronto, we flip a coin and give it to them next time" :w00t: We need to get our D more stable though, if we're going to hold on to the lead. PS. I love the hockey fan/baby ward commercial on VS. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KD in CT Posted February 18, 2009 Report Share Posted February 18, 2009 BS. He's putting his shoulder in a position to avoid hurting it hitting the goal, and the idiot ref says no goal. Ya know, it's one thing if they make a call on the replay, but how the hell is that goal waived off in the first place? Crappola. Still a pretty enjoyable period. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ROC Sabres Posted February 18, 2009 Report Share Posted February 18, 2009 :w00t: We need to get our D more stable though, if we're going to hold on to the lead. PS. I love the hockey fan/baby ward commercial on VS. I would prefer not to have to depend on our D and attack them instead of play the "oh we have a 3-0 lead" game like we did on Friday. And yes, hockey fan/baby commercial, makes me laugh everytime. Can't wait til I have the opportunity to be "THAT GUY" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PASabreFan Posted February 18, 2009 Report Share Posted February 18, 2009 What a bunch of homers! You can't direct the puck into the net with something other than your stick. There wasn't much doubt about that one. Again, I ask: what about being a fan of a team requires you to suspend reality? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SwampD Posted February 18, 2009 Report Share Posted February 18, 2009 What a bunch of homers! You can't direct the puck into the net with something other than your stick. There wasn't much doubt about that one. Again, I ask: what about being a fan of a team requires you to suspend reality? That's just not true. Pucks get redirected all the time by body parts. What an anti-homer! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
... Posted February 18, 2009 Report Share Posted February 18, 2009 What a bunch of homers! You can't direct the puck into the net with something other than your stick. There wasn't much doubt about that one. Again, I ask: what about being a fan of a team requires you to suspend reality? Because it allows the opportunity to crack jokes about The Force and NHL rule-book. Is that so wrong? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExiledInIllinois Posted February 18, 2009 Report Share Posted February 18, 2009 What a bunch of homers! You can't direct the puck into the net with something other than your stick. There wasn't much doubt about that one. Again, I ask: what about being a fan of a team requires you to suspend reality? I was also wondering about that... What does "direct" mean? I have to define it as intentional. Was Pommer's move intentional? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ROC Sabres Posted February 18, 2009 Report Share Posted February 18, 2009 Because it allows the opportunity to crack jokes about The Force and NHL rule-book. Is that so wrong? I wasn't joking. It actually says that! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.