PASabreFan Posted April 25, 2006 Report Share Posted April 25, 2006 "Power play time in the game was extremely lopsided in favor of Buffalo, as the Flyers attempted to use a physical style to get back into the game but were whistled at virtually every turn." Oooooook. I know official team sites have to be as positive as possible, but you can't insult people's intelligence, even Flyer fans. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eleven Posted April 25, 2006 Report Share Posted April 25, 2006 Oooooook. I know official team sites have to be as positive as possible, but you can't insult people's intelligence, even Flyer fans. Don't overestimate those fans. Same folks who had to resort to racist remarks about Mike Grier, right? The threshold is LOW. Limbo-pole-with-a-hot-Brazilian-low. Speaking of which, where's our Monkeygirl? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PASabreFan Posted April 25, 2006 Author Report Share Posted April 25, 2006 Anyone seen MonkeyBoy? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrjsbu96 Posted April 25, 2006 Report Share Posted April 25, 2006 "Power play time in the game was extremely lopsided in favor of Buffalo, as the Flyers attempted to use a physical style to get back into the game but were whistled at virtually every turn." Oooooook. I know official team sites have to be as positive as possible, but you can't insult people's intelligence, even Flyer fans. did anyone think that, even as sabre fans, there were a few calls that we got that probably did not need to be made? i'm all for continuing the rules as they have been called, but i thought this did resort a little to pre-season-esque tonight. with the game out of out reach in late 2nd/3rd, i personally don't think it is necessary to call a penalty on a play where we maintained possession and/or it occurred away from the puck. i know what the new rules are meant to be, etc but it did seem like there was an additional 2 or 3 that they probably could have let go. that said, i am all for calling any penalty that was a result of attempting to hit high or from behind b/c there is no room for that bs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scottnc Posted April 25, 2006 Report Share Posted April 25, 2006 did anyone think that, even as sabre fans, there were a few calls that we got that probably did not need to be made? i'm all for continuing the rules as they have been called, but i thought this did resort a little to pre-season-esque tonight. with the game out of out reach in late 2nd/3rd, i personally don't think it is necessary to call a penalty on a play where we maintained possession and/or it occurred away from the puck. i know what the new rules are meant to be, etc but it did seem like there was an additional 2 or 3 that they probably could have let go. that said, i am all for calling any penalty that was a result of attempting to hit high or from behind b/c there is no room for that bs. A penalty is a penalty. I don't think you start to let stuff go just because one team in winning. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taro T Posted April 25, 2006 Report Share Posted April 25, 2006 did anyone think that, even as sabre fans, there were a few calls that we got that probably did not need to be made? i'm all for continuing the rules as they have been called, but i thought this did resort a little to pre-season-esque tonight. with the game out of out reach in late 2nd/3rd, i personally don't think it is necessary to call a penalty on a play where we maintained possession and/or it occurred away from the puck. i know what the new rules are meant to be, etc but it did seem like there was an additional 2 or 3 that they probably could have let go. that said, i am all for calling any penalty that was a result of attempting to hit high or from behind b/c there is no room for that bs. You are advocating heading down a very slippery slope. The way the rulebook is written, a player is only supposed to be fair game when he possesses the puck or he has passed the puck and no teammate has received it yet. So pretty much any monkey business that happens away from the puck should be called. Calling penalties the way they are written in the book has led to the most exciting season (league-wide, not just for the Sabres) in a long time. That stated, I do think the Sabres got 2 powerplays that might not have been called had the Phlyers not made it amazingly clear that they had no intentions whatsoever to play within the framework of the rules. (But on the flip side, it all balanced out as there were at least 2 other times the Phlyers should have been called; Dumont having his stick slashed out of his hand being the most obvious example.) When a game is as out of hand as last night's was and when one team is attempting to "send a message" the refs need to tighten down even more to make sure the inevitable retaliation will not occur. (Through the old NHL maxim, if the refs won't do something about the garbage, WE will.) If the refs didn't maintain a tight rein, the game would have gotten VERY ugly. Calling all the stupidity DID seem to keep things under control as most of the 3rd period was played cleanly by both teams which was a clear contrast to the 2nd. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kristian Posted April 25, 2006 Report Share Posted April 25, 2006 did anyone think that, even as sabre fans, there were a few calls that we got that probably did not need to be made? i'm all for continuing the rules as they have been called, but i thought this did resort a little to pre-season-esque tonight. with the game out of out reach in late 2nd/3rd, i personally don't think it is necessary to call a penalty on a play where we maintained possession and/or it occurred away from the puck. i know what the new rules are meant to be, etc but it did seem like there was an additional 2 or 3 that they probably could have let go. that said, i am all for calling any penalty that was a result of attempting to hit high or from behind b/c there is no room for that bs. The Flyers were trying their best to goon it up through the 3rd and most of the 2nd, so the fact that they were called on virtually everything made me smile. And my god, how piss-poor are the Philly announcers? After they went down 4-0 it was all about "How the ref's were handing Buffalo the game, how Max dove, how Buffalo is such a dirty team, how The Flyers weren't allowed to clutch and grab. Or 'play defense', as they prefer to call it" etc etc. Made me sick to my stomach. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
topshelfcookies Posted April 25, 2006 Report Share Posted April 25, 2006 The Flyers were trying their best to goon it up through the 3rd and most of the 2nd, so the fact that they were called on virtually everything made me smile. And my god, how piss-poor are the Philly announcers? After they went down 4-0 it was all about "How the ref's were handing Buffalo the game, how Max dove, how Buffalo is such a dirty team, how The Flyers weren't allowed to clutch and grab. Or 'play defense', as they prefer to call it" etc etc. Made me sick to my stomach. Read this article on the homepage regarding Tucker, http://www.courierpostonline.com/apps/pbcs...RTS04/604250399 and his whining about the officiating. Truth is, Philly was built to contend for the Cup in the pre-lockout NHL. They knew that if officials were going to call the game by the book, they would be in trouble. Since that's happening, they're reduced to whining about it, and hoping their comments will get the officials to back off a bit. I really don't think this is going to happen, and I think the league's brass wants it this way. I think top NHL administrators realize that a Cup finals between two teams that can skate, play clean physical hockey and score will be what draws viewers from non-hockey cities towards the game; watching another finals with two defensive minded teams such as Calgary and NJ will do nothing to help grow the league. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spandrel Posted April 25, 2006 Report Share Posted April 25, 2006 I never get this argument. If you are a professional and you know that the refs are calling the game tight, you have to adapt your strategy, plain and simple. If a pitcher knows he's not getting the outside-corner, it is senseless to keep going there to make a point and force the issue. Same goes in football with holding or interference penalties. It sucks to have to do this, but if you want to win, you have to adapt. I mean, the Flyers knew this game was going to be called tight to maintain control after the hit in Game 1, so shame on them for not keeping that in mind. They were more concerned with payback than winning. They are content to try and swim upstream in the newer, faster NHL with their efforts to keep clutching and grabbing. Don't cry when it's called. If the Sabres got some marginal penalty calls, it was because the refs were hell-bent on maintaining control. Understand that and deal with it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.