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 11 hours 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.

[thewookie1]

2 hours ago, pi2000 said:

offside calls should be fully automated, we have the technology.  

It was, by definition of the rule, a hand pass.   Tuch swatted at the puck and wether intentional or not, it hit his glove and went untouched to Thompson for the tap in.   Correct call. 

McDavid's tying goal was clean, had no issues with it.  

Tuch should've received a penalty for a cross check, prior to his hooking penalty.   It was a make-up call, happens all the time.    He knew he got away with the cross-check, no need to reach over the guy and pull him down right in front of the ref.     Low IQ play from Tuch. 

Ruff gets heated at officials.   I like it.    It shows that he cares and he's competitive.  

The jersey tug on Quinn in the final minute was egregious and should've been a penalty.    He felt the tug and he went down, I believe if he stays on his feet and keeps battling he gets that call.    Instead he flopped down to the ice, which refs don't like.... make an effort to battle through the infracton and you'll get the call every time. 

Yes the puck hits Tuch's glove; but yet CGY's 1st goal did the same and went directly in. Both cases had a player unintentionally on purpose touch the puck with his glove and create a goal. However that somehow equates to a hand pass for us and a "deflection" for CGY. 

McDavid's tying goal was not clean by any means; Draisital kicks the leg out from Lyon. If you want to say that Byram pushed him in, ok, but then shouldn't the goal where Thompson got shoved into the goalie, a while back, despite his great effort be ruled the same? Same could even be argued for the one where Benson was somewhat steered into a goalie. 

Then we have the Tuch and Quinn commentary which is where I always get a kick out of the all of you NHL/Ref defenders and how its obviously always the Sabres fault. You guys can hate the owner and be bitter about the playoff drought but that doesn't equal sounding less like a fan and more like you are just rooting against them. Quinn did try to fight through it; it isn't easy to keep balance when someone is trying to surf on your jersey. If the refs saw it as a flop then I have at least 2 earlier calls on us where Oilers flopped at much less. Including the call on Dahlin in the 3rd. As for Tuch, he cross-checked the guy then went over him with strength. A make-up call doesn't matter there, just call the cross-check if that's the case. They happened within 5 seconds and no puck possession had changed yet. To call a hook on that play makes zero sense seeing as Tuch's stick had literally nothing to do with the play. You can't "hook" a guy with your arm in hockey. 

 

What I'm sick of is the Sabres seemingly getting wacked with Goalie Interference calls to the letter while we see teams against us get far more leeway in similar circumstances. 

 

I'll live with a non-icing call if they can better the offside challenge

1. NO Timeout prior to asking for a challenge

2. The Offside must of occurred within 30 seconds of the goal and is voided if the opposing team gains full possession (not a touch, like a pass or attempted clear)

3. Refs have 1 minute to find this; if not the call on the ice stands

[Pimlach]

3 hours ago, PromoTheRobot said:

If the NHL runs that way, then it's no better than the WWE, where the refs never see the villains break the rules.  Call it the same for every team, every game. The notion that you only get fair officiating if you somehow earn respect is horseschitt.

 

[PromoTheRobot]

1 hour ago, Pimlach said:

 

Let's follow your logic a bit.

You believe the Sabres get hosed by officials because "they deserve it." What is the respect Mendoza line in the NHL. Is it teams in a playoff position? Is it teams above .500? Do teams in the bottom five not qualify for fair officiating? Or is that special treatment only reserved for the Sabres?

And if it is only Buffalo that fails to earn the respect of league's officials, are they not putting their thumbs on the scales to keep Buffalo at the bottom? Do I have that right?

[SwampD]

15 minutes ago, PromoTheRobot said:

Let's follow your logic a bit.

You believe the Sabres get hosed by officials because "they deserve it." What is the respect Mendoza line in the NHL. Is it teams in a playoff position? Is it teams above .500? Do teams in the bottom five not qualify for fair officiating? Or is that special treatment only reserved for the Sabres?

And if it is only Buffalo that fails to earn the respect of league's officials, are they not putting their thumbs on the scales to keep Buffalo at the bottom? Do I have that right?

It’s not only Buffalo.

[Believer]

3 hours ago, PerreaultForever said:

The Sabres organization does not understand how you build a culture.

This after years of Adams drafting for “character.”

As @PerreaultForever posted

”Have you notnoticed how much complaining Ruff does? How Sabres players constantly look to refs for calls. Everyone complaining and looking for someone else to fix theproblem. Good teams just get out there and WORK.”

Yes, they do

Last night when the Sabres gave up the tying goal with just seconds left, they didn’t complain. They didn’t hang their heads. They collected themselves. They took possession in OT and never lost it. They appeared determined to win. Tuch in particular looked like he had something to prove.

I think that is character. We need to see more of that team. Preferably in regulation.

[Pimlach]

48 minutes ago, PromoTheRobot said:

Let's follow your logic a bit.

You believe the Sabres get hosed by officials because "they deserve it." What is the respect Mendoza line in the NHL. Is it teams in a playoff position? Is it teams above .500? Do teams in the bottom five not qualify for fair officiating? Or is that special treatment only reserved for the Sabres?

And if it is only Buffalo that fails to earn the respect of league's officials, are they not putting their thumbs on the scales to keep Buffalo at the bottom? Do I have that right?

First, I never said the Sabres get hosed by officials because "they deserve it".   Once again you make a flawed interpretation and try to sell it something someone said or thinks.  Never once did I say "the Sabres deserve it". 

Here is the string of correspondence, here are the receipts Promo.  

Number one

9 hours ago, Pimlach said:

Lindy would have lost the challenge and you know it.  Why get worked up?  they won.  
 

You bolded the above and commented below: 

6 hours ago, PromoTheRobot said:

Won this time. But it seems we get the dirty end of the stick far more often. Are you fine with that?

^First Promo Comment  - The Sabres get the dirty end of stick far more often.  

My response: 

6 hours ago, Pimlach said:

I am not fine with it.  So how about this.  Wake up the owner, tell him to give a damm about his team, and maybe the rest of the league will too.  

My response.  So far the words "we deserved it" which YOU quoted, are not there.   My response points to the state of the team - because the owner does not show he cares, why would the league or anyone else.   

5 hours ago, PromoTheRobot said:

If the NHL runs that way, then it's no better than the WWE, where the refs never see the villains break the rules.  Call it the same for every team, every game. The notion that you only get fair officiating if you somehow earn respect is horseschitt.

You last comment, completely opposite of your first.  

What is it Promo?

Promo 1 -   "We won this time"  But it seems we  get the dirty end of the stick more often"  

Promo 2 -  "Call it the same for every team, every game. The notion that you only get fair officiating if you somehow earn respect is horseschitt."  

You have now flipped the argument over and you are on the other side.  As long as you can disagree you will.  That is what you do.  

Now, this has gone full circle and I am done. 

Edited 7 hours ago by Pimlach

[PromoTheRobot]

24 minutes ago, Pimlach said:

First, I never said the Sabres get hosed by officials because "they deserve it".   Once again you make a flawed interpretation and try to sell it something someone said or thinks.  Never once did I say "the Sabres deserve it". 

Here is the string of correspondence, here are the receipts Promo.  

Number one

You bolded the above and commented below: 

^First Promo Comment  - The Sabres get the dirty end of stick far more often.  

My response: 

My response.  So far the words "we deserved it" which YOU quoted, are not there.   My response points to the state of the team - because the owner does not show he cares, why would the league or anyone else.   

You last comment, completely opposite of your first.  

What is it Promo?

Promo 1 -   "We won this time"  But it seems we  get the dirty end of the stick more often"  

Promo 2 -  "Call it the same for every team, every game. The notion that you only get fair officiating if you somehow earn respect is horseschitt."  

You have now flipped the argument over and you are on the other side.  As long as you can disagree you will.  That is what you do.  

Now, this has gone full circle and I am done. 

When you said "Wake up the owner, tell him to give a damm about his team, and maybe the rest of the league will too." I took that as you saying the league will start treating the team fairly once the owner does something. Did I get that wrong?

As for your claim that I contradicted myself, I don't see it. I said that the Sabres seem to be on the wrong side of calls more often. Most here agree. Then you made the suggestion that the league won't treat the team fairly until the owner does something. Then I said if that's how the NHL is run then it's more like the WWE than a pro sports league. I don't see a contradiction.

Edited 6 hours ago by PromoTheRobot

[Cityo'Rasmii]

This may have already been highlighted above in this thread but it must be said. How sweet it was last night in OT for McLeod to make such a beautiful pass to Tuch in OT against his former team.

Go Sabres

[Doohickie]

7 hours ago, PASabreFan said:

Probably true. I suspect that the league thinks (or knows, based on data) that replay reviews, aka letting the fan make the call, make the product "stickier." It draws and retains attention.

Outrage sells.

[PerreaultForever]

3 hours ago, Believer said:

This after years of Adams drafting for “character.”

As @PerreaultForever posted

”Have you notnoticed how much complaining Ruff does? How Sabres players constantly look to refs for calls. Everyone complaining and looking for someone else to fix theproblem. Good teams just get out there and WORK.”

Yes, they do

Last night when the Sabres gave up the tying goal with just seconds left, they didn’t complain. They didn’t hang their heads. They collected themselves. They took possession in OT and never lost it. They appeared determined to win. Tuch in particular looked like he had something to prove.

I think that is character. We need to see more of that team. Preferably in regulation.

We need that for 60 though not just OT. It's lacking more often than it's there. 

[Believer]

4 minutes ago, PerreaultForever said:

We need that for 60 though not just OT. It's lacking more often than it's there. 

The point is, it’s in there, PerreaultForever, and it’s capable of busting out at any time.

It’s a big reason so many of us watch as many games as we can despite the many seasons of disappointment.

It is really something to enjoy when it happens.

 

 

[SwampD]

These “who’s a better fan” debates are tiresome.

I really wish we could be discussing our winning hockey team.

Terry, sell the team or fire Kevyn Adams, I don’t care which, but ya gotta do something, cuz this sucks.

[quill]

Instead of going over everything on the game tape that the Sabres did right or wrong, Lindy should have his players study everything the Oilers did right, starting from late in the 2nd period and throughout the third period after they woke up and started playing hockey. The Oilers put on a clinic for most of that time period.

[PerreaultForever]

2 hours ago, Believer said:

The point is, it’s in there, PerreaultForever, and it’s capable of busting out at any time.

It’s a big reason so many of us watch as many games as we can despite the many seasons of disappointment.

It is really something to enjoy when it happens.

 

 

How long you been watching?

How do you maintain this unfounded optimism? Every year they actually show the opposite.