GDT- Buffalo Sabres @ Edmonton Oilers, December 9th,2025/ 9pm ESPN-WGR

[shrader]

35 minutes ago, Jorcus said:

 Not just the Sabres. It's an NHL problem not a specific to us. This happened last night.  

https://www.sportsnet.ca/nhl/video/wedgewood-pulled-by-spotter-in-shootout-after-collision-with-forsberg/

Also Duffer was commenting about the Sens going after Markstrom in NJ. 

Forsberg lost an edge there. No one is intentionally running a goalie during a shootout attempt. 
 

But it does make me want to suggest a rule. If you intentionally run a goalie in a shootout, your team automatically loses. 
 

edit: Hell, forfeit the loser point too. 

Edited 59 minutes ago by shrader

[PerreaultForever]

1 minute ago, PromoTheRobot said:

But what you said was Doan should be on a different team. 

Yes, I like Doan. I like how he plays. He is the kind of player you should have been building around all along. I feel for him because in time he will lose his love for hockey. 

The Sabres organization does not understand how you build a culture. It is simple as that. Two things to consider. Heard Hamilton today pointing out in their entire history they have only hired an experienced GM (experienced as a GM) twice. Scotty Bowman and Punch Imlach. Two eras in which we had a good hockey team. The eras that made me into a Sabres fan. Very telling. 

The second you won't like because I heard it said at the Bruins post game presser. Quote from Sturm that says everything "that's what good teams do. They don't complain. They just go out and work." Have you not noticed how much complaining Ruff does? How Sabres players constantly look to refs for calls. Everyone complaining and looking for someone else to fix the problem. Good teams just get out there and WORK. 

Pegula does not understand any of this. 

[Taro T]

1 hour ago, PASabreFan said:

Another well written NHL Rule, Mamba Number 81.

For the purpose of this rule, the point of last contact with the puck 
by the team in possession shall be used to determine whether icing 
has occurred or not. As such, the team in possession must “gain the 
line” in order for the icing to be nullified. “Gaining the line” shall mean 
that the puck, while on the player’s stick (not the player’s skate) must 
make contact with the center red line in order to nullify a potential 
icing.

Yes, and the stick was still well on the Eulers side of the line when it stopped making contact with the puck.  It was in fact a blown call.  Not the 1st that game; not the last.

And, personally, believe that IF they are going to review a significant subset of plays that should've resulted in a whistle to end the play after a goal has been scored then they should review ALL non-judgement calls as to whether play should have been stopped when they lead directly to the goal being scored.  They can have somebody watching the game determining whether something is questionable and MIGHT require additional review in real time just like they claim they do with all plays that result in the puck traversing near the net.  So, on that 1st goal, have somebody upstairs or in TO beep down and say, uh guys, that puck wasn't close to being over the red line when it was shot into the zone.  It was an egreious error and it had a significant effect on how the game played out past that point.  It literally led directly to the Eulers' 1st goal.  Had the guy who shot it down the ice played it with a high stick that didn't get called, they would've been able to call the goal back.  What's the material difference in how the puck was transferred to the goalie from one case to the other.  Review them both or review neither of them, but just be consistent.

And would be ok with going back to none of that being reviewable, if that's the way they want it to go; though personally would prefer to see them fix the replay system (as it CAN be a useful tool) rather than get rid of it (and they aren't getting rid of it, no matter how much you want them to).  But it is dumb to have stuff like a potential hand pass or the puck hitting the net above the glass being reviewable and not other major potential misses that can result in a team letting up ever so slightly because their players KNOW the play is about to be whistled dead.

Not overly germane to this discussion, but a blown icing call in OT very possibly cost the Sabres a chance to get thumped by the Red Wings back in '98.  They changed the video review rules because of other events of that game, but didn't alter that aspect of the review.

[PromoTheRobot]

4 minutes ago, PerreaultForever said:

Yes, I like Doan. I like how he plays. He is the kind of player you should have been building around all along. I feel for him because in time he will lose his love for hockey. 

The Sabres organization does not understand how you build a culture. It is simple as that. Two things to consider. Heard Hamilton today pointing out in their entire history they have only hired an experienced GM (experienced as a GM) twice. Scotty Bowman and Punch Imlach. Two eras in which we had a good hockey team. The eras that made me into a Sabres fan. Very telling. 

The second you won't like because I heard it said at the Bruins post game presser. Quote from Sturm that says everything "that's what good teams do. They don't complain. They just go out and work." Have you not noticed how much complaining Ruff does? How Sabres players constantly look to refs for calls. Everyone complaining and looking for someone else to fix the problem. Good teams just get out there and WORK. 

Pegula does not understand any of this. 

Lol, I've seen this happen once or twice.