Ducks may have been the highest scoring team in the league, but they still bore me to death regardless. One of my least favourite teams to watch in the league.
2015 Stanley Cup Playoffs Part 2
- Thread starter RockLobster
- Start date
- Status
BobRossColton
Registered User
The Shermanator
HFBoards Legend
landy92mack29
Registered User
Thepoolmaster
Registered User
- Dec 3, 2011
- 1,999
- 759
The Shermanator
HFBoards Legend
BoxOfChocolates
Registered User
- Mar 7, 2010
- 11,453
- 1,616
dahrougem2
Registered User
I don't think anybody should be surprised that this series is going 6 after the way it's been played. IMO, the Canadiens were the better team in game 1 and most definitely the better team in game 3. I feel they should have been up 3-1 heading into game 5, not Tampa. Nonetheless, they're down and have to claw back, but it wouldn't shock me one bit to see Montreal beat Tampa in 7. I think they're a better team than Tampa is.
tigervixxxen
Optimism=Delusional
Cousin Eddie
You Serious Clark?
- Nov 3, 2006
- 40,161
- 37,363
That puck hit the glass before it went over at the end of the game. I really think calling a penalty for shooting the puck over the glass is the most flawed rule in hockey. It needs to be treated just like an icing next year. Luckily it never changed anything that time but had Washington scored on that powerplay the hockey world would have erupted.
BaconNater
Registered User
As much as I want them to, I don't think Caps win that Game 7. Just like if Montreal wins that Game 6 in Tampa, they probably will take the series.
tigervixxxen
Optimism=Delusional
The dumbest penalty is the trapezoid penalty. They want to increase scoring that one has to go. I dont have an issue with the puck over the glass penalty. Yeah now it's called when it's an accident but if it wasn't a penalty guys would do it constantly on purpose. I guess icing would be a compromise at least.
Cousin Eddie
You Serious Clark?
- Nov 3, 2006
- 40,161
- 37,363
Icing was created because people would purposely shoot the puck down the ice when in trouble. About 60 years later they added a rule to force them to keep the same players on the ice after an icing. Why is shooting the puck over the glass any different?
Cousin Eddie
You Serious Clark?
- Nov 3, 2006
- 40,161
- 37,363
I know what you mean, but before the rule was created it was always a blast down the ice (or so I read). Eventually players worked on not getting it down all the way so there wouldn't be icing and they could just get the puck out.
If the over the glass rule resulted in a faceoff in your own end without being able to change it would be the same adaptation. Players would try to put less velocity on it so it hits the top of the glass and trickles out but if they put too much oomph on it and it goes over they pay the price by not being able to change.
There's just no way they should have such a harmless rule be so black and white when every other call a referee makes is pure judgement. IF calls were consistent it would be fine but calls aren't consistent. A referee can watch a player chop, hack and beat a player and turn a blind eye but then when a player accidently shoots the puck an inch too high or hits the puck on a bad angle causing the puck to go over the glass they have to sit for two minutes. The play is a lot more similar to an icing than it is a slash, hook or trip.
P.S. Tiger I hate the trapezoid too.
- Status
Ad
Upcoming events
-
-
French Open - Women's FINAL - Iga Swiatek vs Jasmine PaoliniWagers: 2Staked: $2,010.00Event closes- Updated:
-
Stanley Cup PICK ONE PLAYER - Conn Smythe Trophy WinnerWagers: 13Staked: $19,415.00Event closes- Updated:
-
Series Winner Edmonton Oilers vs Florida PanthersWagers: 24Staked: $87,937.00Event closes- Updated:
-
