gregkash Posted April 9, 2011 Report Share Posted April 9, 2011 Did anyone have the great great foresight to record the game today and can put the last minute or so of regulation on youtube? I had a show tonight and couldn't watch and I really want to see it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JujuFish Posted April 9, 2011 Report Share Posted April 9, 2011 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HXU29ID-0IQ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheMatrix31 Posted April 9, 2011 Report Share Posted April 9, 2011 Awesome! Thanks for the video! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Foligno's Nose Posted April 9, 2011 Report Share Posted April 9, 2011 Not to be a dick, but that is a sad statement on the NHL. We were in this position about ten years ago in a end-of-season game against Washington. We tied at the end if regulation to earn the playoff berth. Just something wrong about it. Otherwise, we are supposed to make the playoffs. Anthony less is a failure. Congrats to this team and the run they have made since December. I had them wrote off, Lindy and Darcy fired, and the fire sale of players. What a huge accomplishment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deluca67 Posted April 9, 2011 Report Share Posted April 9, 2011 Not to be a dick, but that is a sad statement on the NHL. We were in this position about ten years ago in a end-of-season game against Washington. We tied at the end if regulation to earn the playoff berth. Just something wrong about it. Otherwise, we are supposed to make the playoffs. Anthony less is a failure. Congrats to this team and the run they have made since December. I had them wrote off, Lindy and Darcy fired, and the fire sale of players. What a huge accomplishment. As the clock was ticking down I wondered if the NHL would fine both teams. For two teams to stop playing while the outcome of the game is still in doubt really is an insult to the integrity of the game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nucci Posted April 9, 2011 Report Share Posted April 9, 2011 Point system needs to be changed. You shouldn't get a point for losing a game. Eliminate the shootout, go to a 10 minute 4-on-4 OT. A very good chance someone will score in 10 minutes. Winner gets 2 points, loser 0. After 10 minutes then game is a tie with each team getting 1 point. I think if teams know that they have to win to get 2 you won't see teams settling for OT and a SO. JMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wjag Posted April 9, 2011 Report Share Posted April 9, 2011 As the clock was ticking down I wondered if the NHL would fine both teams. For two teams to stop playing while the outcome of the game is still in doubt really is an insult to the integrity of the game. I wasn't thinking fine, but I was wondering if it wasn't poor sportsmanship. If I'm the Rangers, I sure feel that way today. Only the NHL can create this moment based on how they score points. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deluca67 Posted April 9, 2011 Report Share Posted April 9, 2011 Point system needs to be changed. You shouldn't get a point for losing a game. Eliminate the shootout, go to a 10 minute 4-on-4 OT. A very good chance someone will score in 10 minutes. Winner gets 2 points, loser 0. After 10 minutes then game is a tie with each team getting 1 point. I think if teams know that they have to win to get 2 you won't see teams settling for OT and a SO. JMO. They need to drop the point system completely. Wins & losses are all you need. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stormin Norman Posted April 9, 2011 Report Share Posted April 9, 2011 Wow. Folks need to lighten up. From a strategy standpoint. It was the right thing to do for both teams as they each needed the point, and it amounted to 45 seconds of hockey. Plus, both teams knew there was overtime and a shootout to decide a winner. I have no problem with it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wjag Posted April 9, 2011 Report Share Posted April 9, 2011 Wow. Folks need to lighten up. From a strategy standpoint. It was the right thing to do for both teams as they each needed the point, and it amounted to 45 seconds of hockey. Plus, both teams knew there was overtime and a shootout to decide a winner. I have no problem with it. My point was that in all of professional sports, it is the only sport that makes not competing the right thing to do. On second thought maybe football (soccer) could generate this moment/decision. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eball Posted April 9, 2011 Report Share Posted April 9, 2011 My point was that in all of professional sports, it is the only sport that makes not competing the right thing to do. On second thought maybe football (soccer) could generate this moment/decision. What's a kneel-down in football? Or a player running towards the endzone and then purposefully going down at the one to run clock, as we've seen several instances of in the past two NFL seasons? Both are examples of "not competing" in order to get the result you desire. This is much ado about nothing. If the Rangers are upset about that, perhaps they shouldn't have laid an egg at home against Atlanta earlier in the week. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wjag Posted April 9, 2011 Report Share Posted April 9, 2011 What's a kneel-down in football? Or a player running towards the endzone and then purposefully going down at the one to run clock, as we've seen several instances of in the past two NFL seasons? Both are examples of "not competing" in order to get the result you desire. This is much ado about nothing. If the Rangers are upset about that, perhaps they shouldn't have laid an egg at home against Atlanta earlier in the week. Okay fair enough. But those are still examples of one team making the decison and the other having to live it. This, both teams clearly backed off. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eleven Posted April 9, 2011 Report Share Posted April 9, 2011 My point was that in all of professional sports, it is the only sport that makes not competing the right thing to do. On second thought maybe football (soccer) could generate this moment/decision. It often does happen in soccer. In fact, there was a game where a team deliberately scored on itself--and then defended its opponent's net: http://www.snopes.com/sports/soccer/barbados.asp What's a kneel-down in football? Or a player running towards the endzone and then purposefully going down at the one to run clock, as we've seen several instances of in the past two NFL seasons? Both are examples of "not competing" in order to get the result you desire. I was thinking the same thing. In pro basketball, we refer to the same phenomenon as "the first 46 minutes of the game." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wjag Posted April 9, 2011 Report Share Posted April 9, 2011 It often does happen in soccer. In fact, there was a game where a team deliberately scored on itself--and then defended its opponent's net: http://www.snopes.com/sports/soccer/barbados.asp I was thinking the same thing. In pro basketball, we refer to the same phenomenon as "the first 46 minutes of the game." That's an incredible story. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Foligno's Nose Posted April 9, 2011 Report Share Posted April 9, 2011 If the Rangers are upset about that, perhaps they shouldn't have laid an egg at home against Atlanta earlier in the week. Yeah. Just like the NFL. Clinched teams not playing the starters in week 17. I don't begrudge them the fact that they earned the opportunity to coast the last game without it affecting their playoff position. Same here with Philly and Buffalo. They ended up in the posiions there were in - both needing the point. Tough cookies for Carolina and NYR. I just agree that it is bush to have those 45 seconds of waste. Same with the kneel downs or the like. There are obvious holes in the point systems, and some rules, that allow for these situations. Room for improvement. I will never shed a tear for the teams that bitch because they feel thy are victims. F that noise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deluca67 Posted April 9, 2011 Report Share Posted April 9, 2011 What's a kneel-down in football? Or a player running towards the endzone and then purposefully going down at the one to run clock, as we've seen several instances of in the past two NFL seasons? Both are examples of "not competing" in order to get the result you desire. This is much ado about nothing. If the Rangers are upset about that, perhaps they shouldn't have laid an egg at home against Atlanta earlier in the week. The team that kneels down is usually ahead unless it's at the end of the first half. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eleven Posted April 9, 2011 Report Share Posted April 9, 2011 Yeah. Just like the NFL. Clinched teams not playing the starters in week 17. I don't begrudge them the fact that they earned the opportunity to coast the last game without it affecting their playoff position. Same here with Philly and Buffalo. They ended up in the posiions there were in - both needing the point. Tough cookies for Carolina and NYR. I just agree that it is bush to have those 45 seconds of waste. Same with the kneel downs or the like. There are obvious holes in the point systems, and some rules, that allow for these situations. Room for improvement. I will never shed a tear for the teams that bitch because they feel thy are victims. F that noise. Right on. Bottom line: the Sabres needed one point and made sure they got it. I swear, for half of that time, it seemed like Filly didn't even realize that the Sabres were killing the clock. And it is Filly--not real bright, you know? Assuming no collusion, the Sabres' tactics last night were no more nefarious then they were against Tampa when Mancari held the puck against the boards. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wjag Posted April 9, 2011 Report Share Posted April 9, 2011 Right on. Bottom line: the Sabres needed one point and made sure they got it. I swear, for half of that time, it seemed like Filly didn't even realize that the Sabres were killing the clock. And it is Filly--not real bright, you know? Assuming no collusion, the Sabres' tactics last night were no more nefarious then they were against Tampa when Mancari held the puck against the boards. Amen.. No tears shed. I'm happy as can be.. Just discussing for the sake of it. Mancari was competing to lock it up and Tampa was trying not to let him. Buffalo-Philly both made the same decision for the same reason. They were chasing a point and not competing was the BEST option for both teams. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deluca67 Posted April 9, 2011 Report Share Posted April 9, 2011 Right on. Bottom line: the Sabres needed one point and made sure they got it. I swear, for half of that time, it seemed like Filly didn't even realize that the Sabres were killing the clock. And it is Filly--not real bright, you know? Assuming no collusion, the Sabres' tactics last night were no more nefarious then they were against Tampa when Mancari held the puck against the boards. It's the combined that seemed odd. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tom webster Posted April 9, 2011 Report Share Posted April 9, 2011 My initial reaction to the end of the game was the same as DeLuca's. However, I find it interesting that a poster that believes that the regular season is a mere tune up for the playoffs would find anything wrong with a tactic that seems to concur. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ROC Sabres Posted April 9, 2011 Report Share Posted April 9, 2011 That's an incredible story. I was thinking the same thing. That's crazy but does point out that the flaw was not with what the teams did, but the point system they used. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OverPowerYou Posted April 9, 2011 Report Share Posted April 9, 2011 I think of it this way - sometimes in football, the quarterback will kneel the ball or waste clock just to get to overtime because he doesn't want to risk giving the other team a chance to win in regulation. This is what both teams did, they would rather settle the game in overtime. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sabreade Posted April 9, 2011 Report Share Posted April 9, 2011 I had no problem with it at all. Both teams did what was right for them, you're not worried about what other teams have at stake that's not their problem. Could you imagine if Myers was standing there with the puck like he did then ruff started to wave at him to take the puck down, so Myers does only to turn it over and lose the game. In the post game Ruff would say "Well, we didn't want to upset the Rangers or Hurricanes so I wanted Myers to move the puck". That would be absurd. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Overeducated Homer Posted April 9, 2011 Report Share Posted April 9, 2011 I think of it this way - sometimes in football, the quarterback will kneel the ball or waste clock just to get to overtime because he doesn't want to risk giving the other team a chance to win in regulation. This is what both teams did, they would rather settle the game in overtime. Quite so. Both teams decided to wait for OT to decide it. It happens in many sports, especially when the risk of trying to win it in the last seconds is not worth it. No conspiracy, no "slap in the face" (/Mike Schopp) to the game or anything. Golly whiz but there are so many folks here who want to be angry about something when the Sabres just beat Philly in OT to go to the playoffs. I for one am letting that bolded part sink it. Feels pretty good. :beer: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wjag Posted April 9, 2011 Report Share Posted April 9, 2011 Quite so. Both teams decided to wait for OT to decide it. It happens in many sports, especially when the risk of trying to win it in the last seconds is not worth it. No conspiracy, no "slap in the face" (/Mike Schopp) to the game or anything. Golly whiz but there are so many folks here who want to be angry about something when the Sabres just beat Philly in OT to go to the playoffs. I for one am letting that bolded part sink it. Feels pretty good. :beer: Separate out anger from conversation. No one, and I mean no one on this board is angry about last night. It's always a good morning when Buffalo beats Philly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.