GDT: 4/22/14 - 7:00PM EDT - #2 Tampa Bay @ #3 Montréal [ECQF GAME 4]

[Godzilla]

You are not trying. Have you played hockey before, have you watched it before? That is 100% holding, roughing. Paquette absolutely tripped him but he was also held/roughed right before. Call it both ways it's that simple.

We still should have killed the penalty but yeah.. Take the glasses off buddy.

LOL. I have played at a pretty high level, and I am a referee. I know how to play the game, and how the game needs to be called.

My glasses were off even before you put yours on, and I have been nothing but respectful and gracious towards your team and organization from the beginning, so feel free to go to my post history and see for yourself.

 

[FDfranklin]

LOL. I have played at a pretty high level, and I am a referee. I know how to play the game, and how the game needs to be called.

My glasses were off even before you put yours on, and I have been nothing but respectful and gracious towards your team and organization from the beginning, so feel free to go to my post history and see for yourself.

What does your respect for our team have anything to do with it?

Why should one call be let go but not the other? Why is it such a bad thing for our fans to ask for consistency? I can't possible think of a situation where that holding/roughing would not be called a penalty.

I absolutely think your team deserved to win the series but I absolutely think we got the **** end of the stick on a lot of calls/no calls. (game 3/4)

 

[Steve Yzerman]

During the skirmish the refs can give penalties to both Bournival and Paquette, and he decided not to do so. After both of them were getting up and then Paquette tripped him to create a turnover in the offensive, the refs can only give the tripping penalty to Paquette. The blame should be put on Paquette for losing his cool.

This has absolutely no relevance to what I was talking about. Why did you bother quoting me?

 

[AlphaCatalyst]

Was Montreal the better team, yes but for all the "dominating" they did they still only walked away with one decisive win. The other 3 games were close. I know a lot of people will say well the score is not inductive of the play, but really, who cares, the fact is Tampa played poorly/Montreal played great and yet Tampa was still in the majority of the games up until the final whistle. If Tampa plays 10% or even 5% better than they did or if Lindback does not go all Lindback on us that series is still going on and possibly even 3-1 in our favour. I said it in the main board thread but I find it convenient how in games 1, 3 & 4 with the score tied and Tampa actually putting on some pressure and getting chances that that is when the refs call a penalty (or in game threes case not call one). Game 1 against Killorn with less than 3 min left, sure Montreal does not score but Tampa never gets any momentum back from it either. Game 3, I don't have to say it but I will, hold Montreal to 0 shots for 12 min span, the no goal call, then Stamkos gets interfered with and subsequently take a knee to the head. Momentum is not only gone but team loses focus because of Stamkos injury and Montreal scores a min later. And of course game 4 the call again with less than 3 min left to seal our fate. For the record game 1 and 4 calls were penalties sure, but there was a lot of non calls just before those. I am not upset at the calls but the timing is what gets me. Tie game with Tampa having momentum and all of a sudden it is gone and they cannot recover before Montreal scores and gets the momentum in their favour. I really believe that if Bishop is healthy there is a chance we sweep them. (For the Montreal fans reading this scoffing at it, rewatch the regular season games between us when Bishop played vs the Playoff games, 2 completly different teams). That said I do wish Kristers had started game 4. Finally if Montreal "Dominates" us and barely scrapes out 3 wins out of four games they are going to get destroyed themselves next round.

 

[Godzilla]

What does your respect for our team have anything to do with it?

Why should one call be let go but not the other? Why is it such a bad thing for our fans to ask for consistency? I can't possible think of a situation where that holding/roughing would not be called a penalty.

I absolutely think your team deserved to win the series but I absolutely think we got the **** end of the stick on a lot of calls/no calls. (game 3/4)

I really dont mean this is an affront in any way, but are you new to playoff hockey? Are you aware of just how much the refs will let go during the playoffs vs the regular season?

I have been watching and playing hockey for 40 years, and every single season it is the same thing. Stuff that normally gets called during the regular season goes unoticed in the playoffs. It has been that way since the beginning of time, and unfortunately next year, and the year after that, and so on, it will be the exact same thing. You dont have to agree with it, but it is what it is.

The refs let stuff go for both teams the entire series, and they were only going to call infractions that were blatant.

That my friend, is playoff hockey.

 

[FDfranklin]

I really dont mean this is an affront in any way, but are you new to playoff hockey? Are you aware of just how much the refs will let go during the playoffs vs the regular season?

I have been watching and playing hockey for 40 years, and every single season it is the same thing. Stuff that normally gets called during the regular season goes unoticed in the playoffs. It has been that way since the beginning of time, and unfortunately next year, and the year after that, and so on, it will be the exact same thing. You dont have to agree with it, but it is what it is.

The refs let stuff go for both teams the entire series, and they were only going to call infractions that were blatant.

That my friend, is playoff hockey.

Which is exactly why they should have let the trip go if that is the case. Like I said, consistency. I'm not arguing they hold their whistle in playoffs, I'm arguing consistency.

Two blatant penalties happen within seconds involving both players, you call it both ways. I would ask the same against my team and unless you are blatantly being a homer you should want the same.

If Gudas held down Prust in the corner for 10 seconds away from the puck got up and was tripped by Prust I would expect them both to get penalties. You simply can't hold your whistle for 18 minutes in one period and then only call one penalty when both are deserving.

 

[Coopers Gum]

I really dont mean this is an affront in any way, but are you new to playoff hockey? Are you aware of just how much the refs will let go during the playoffs vs the regular season?

I have been watching and playing hockey for 40 years, and every single season it is the same thing. Stuff that normally gets called during the regular season goes unoticed in the playoffs. It has been that way since the beginning of time, and unfortunately next year, and the year after that, and so on, it will be the exact same thing. You dont have to agree with it, but it is what it is.

The refs let stuff go for both teams the entire series, and they were only going to call infractions that were blatant.

That my friend, is playoff hockey.

The crosscheck to the face of Callahan right in front of the ref wasn't blatant? The many trips for both teams weren't blatant? The molestation of Paquette in the corner wasn't blatant? Then, a trip is FINALLY called, after it's been let go the entire game, with 2 minutes left in the game to put Montreal on the PP, and take all the wind out of Tampa's sails.

Can you see why it's frustrating? Call it consistent, and we wouldn't be complaining.

 

[FDfranklin]

The crosscheck to the face of Callahan right in front of the ref wasn't blatant? The many trips for both teams weren't blatant? The molestation of Paquette in the corner wasn't blatant? Then, a trip is FINALLY called, after it's been let go the entire game, with 2 minutes left in the game to put Montreal on the PP, and take all the wind out of Tampa's sails.

Can you see why it's frustrating? Call it consistent, and we wouldn't be complaining.

I don't think any of us are arguing that the trip was a trip. We just wanted consistency, there were 4 no call trips that were extremely blatant on us, that's fine don't call it both ways because we got away with some but to finally call it with 2 minutes left in the game after Paquette was interfered with in the corner? Maddening.

 

[Hockeyfan02]

This team really didn't deserve any breaks for how it played for most of the game last night but that was a bad one. If they call that midway through the first, fine it's a trip I have no problem with that. The problem is they let a ton of calls go throughout the game and even Paquette getting mugged in the corner. The refs have a tough job policing a very fast game but they need to be consistent. That wasn't the case with that call. I don't believe that time of game should impact a call but if you've set a standard stick to it. Don't change it with two minutes left.

 

[2MinutesforGiraffing]

That said I do wish Kristers had started game 4.

It's funny how many people asked me why we didn't start Kristers in game 3 or 4. Non-interested parties who were honestly baffled by the decision to pull Lindy in game 2 (yeah yeah..for the 'spark') and then go right back to him. It wasn't hard to see Lindback struggling out there and, at least by game 4, we didn't have much to lose. I believe we might have won last night if we hadn't had those 2 Lindback Softies (TM) to overcome. Refs be damned.

 

[Kramerica Industries]

I really dont mean this is an affront in any way, but are you new to playoff hockey? Are you aware of just how much the refs will let go during the playoffs vs the regular season?

I have been watching and playing hockey for 40 years, and every single season it is the same thing. Stuff that normally gets called during the regular season goes unoticed in the playoffs. It has been that way since the beginning of time, and unfortunately next year, and the year after that, and so on, it will be the exact same thing. You dont have to agree with it, but it is what it is.

The refs let stuff go for both teams the entire series, and they were only going to call infractions that were blatant.

That my friend, is playoff hockey.

I understand this, and in many ways I have no problem with this. Ticky-tack penalties shouldn't decide playoff games. Hell, even if we forget all the shenanigans with Bournival and Pacquette leading up to the trip, I might even agree there was a penalty infraction there.

But was Rene Bourque running Gudlevskis not a penalty just seven minutes prior to that? It just seems like penalties have something like a statute of limitations during when they can be called in a game, except then when they are called after such a statue has expired. This isn't a game-specific complaint as much as it is a refereeing complaint league-wide. It s a tad bit annoying at times, you can probably see that side of the argument.

 

[Antiramie]

This team really didn't deserve any breaks for how it played for most of the game last night but that was a bad one. If they call that midway through the first, fine it's a trip I have no problem with that. The problem is they let a ton of calls go throughout the game and even Paquette getting mugged in the corner. The refs have a tough job policing a very fast game but they need to be consistent. That wasn't the case with that call. I don't believe that time of game should impact a call but if you've set a standard stick to it. Don't change it with two minutes left.

Exactly. It's like calling balls and strikes in baseball. If an ump's zone isn't perfect but he's been consistently calling a pitch that's just below the knees a strike all game, he sure as hell better call it that way in the 9th inning.

 

[Godzilla]

I understand this, and in many ways I have no problem with this. Ticky-tack penalties shouldn't decide playoff games. Hell, even if we forget all the shenanigans with Bournival and Pacquette leading up to the trip, I might even agree there was a penalty infraction there.

But was Rene Bourque running Gudlevskis not a penalty just seven minutes prior to that? It just seems like penalties have something like a statute of limitations during when they can be called in a game, except then when they are called after such a statue has expired. This isn't a game-specific complaint as much as it is a refereeing complaint league-wide. It s a tad bit annoying at times, you can probably see that side of the argument.

Yes, Bourque should have gotten goalie intererference i suppose, but there were calls on both sides that were missed.

It is very annoying, but it is what it is. What can I tell you....

 

[FDfranklin]

Yes, Bourque should have gotten goalie intererference i suppose, but there were calls on both sides that were missed.

It is very annoying, but it is what it is. What can I tell you....

We want a re-trial.

Not sure if you will get the joke being from Canada though.

 

[CupsOverCash]

Was Montreal the better team, yes but for all the "dominating" they did they still only walked away with one decisive win. The other 3 games were close. I know a lot of people will say well the score is not inductive of the play, but really, who cares, the fact is Tampa played poorly/Montreal played great and yet Tampa was still in the majority of the games up until the final whistle. If Tampa plays 10% or even 5% better than they did or if Lindback does not go all Lindback on us that series is still going on and possibly even 3-1 in our favour. I said it in the main board thread but I find it convenient how in games 1, 3 & 4 with the score tied and Tampa actually putting on some pressure and getting chances that that is when the refs call a penalty (or in game threes case not call one). Game 1 against Killorn with less than 3 min left, sure Montreal does not score but Tampa never gets any momentum back from it either. Game 3, I don't have to say it but I will, hold Montreal to 0 shots for 12 min span, the no goal call, then Stamkos gets interfered with and subsequently take a knee to the head. Momentum is not only gone but team loses focus because of Stamkos injury and Montreal scores a min later. And of course game 4 the call again with less than 3 min left to seal our fate. For the record game 1 and 4 calls were penalties sure, but there was a lot of non calls just before those. I am not upset at the calls but the timing is what gets me. Tie game with Tampa having momentum and all of a sudden it is gone and they cannot recover before Montreal scores and gets the momentum in their favour. I really believe that if Bishop is healthy there is a chance we sweep them. (For the Montreal fans reading this scoffing at it, rewatch the regular season games between us when Bishop played vs the Playoff games, 2 completly different teams). That said I do wish Kristers had started game 4. Finally if Montreal "Dominates" us and barely scrapes out 3 wins out of four games they are going to get destroyed themselves next round.

Couldn't agree more. Montreal was given this series on a plate served nice and fresh. They won't be given this treatment for the rest of the playoffs and the quick sweep will hurt them more than help them. The ego boost they got from this will hurt them more than help them. They would have benefitted from a equal called series where they most likely still would have won but would have been challenged a lot more and when your tested and break through your more likely to have built some character. This will spoil them rotten and won't help their chances at all in winning the cup.

But congrats to the Canadians on winning the series. They were the better team and the lightning looked like a team that was getting their first experiences of what it's like to be in the playoffs. I just wish we would have had Bishop in net, healthy Palat and Filpula, and even officiating. It would have been a much more entertaining series. Oh well the lightning will learn much from this series and I think they come back next year a better team. Things like this build character and I think this club knows how to come back from such adversity. Plus it will help to have bishop back and Drouin on the team next year.

 

[Godzilla]

We want a re-trial.

Not sure if you will get the joke being from Canada though.

I think I get it....but then again all we are good for is drinking beer and shoveling snow.



In all honesty, It is bitter sweet for me being a Habs fan. No teams fan base wants their team to win surrounded by controversy.

Also, Tampa deserved so much better considering what they fought through all season long to get to the playoffs, that it just doesnt seem right that they went out in 4 games.

You have a young team that have undoubtedly learned so much in these playoffs, that it can only get better moving forward.

 

[Kramerica Industries]

Yes, Bourque should have gotten goalie intererference i suppose, but there were calls on both sides that were missed.

It is very annoying, but it is what it is. What can I tell you....

it's just that's all I'm getting at. Clearly, the refs were letting the players play in that third period. Which is fine as long as there is consistency. It just leaves a bit of a bad taste in the mouth that, after 18 minutes of that, suddenly Paquette's getting nailed with a penalty.

Nothing that cost TB the game or the series because they lost those (and Montreal won those) on their own merits. Just strikes the funny bone when that call comes up out of complete obscurity.

The civil discussion is well appreciated on this end.

 

[ThunderBuddy]

I really dont mean this is an affront in any way, but are you new to playoff hockey? Are you aware of just how much the refs will let go during the playoffs vs the regular season?

I have been watching and playing hockey for 40 years, and every single season it is the same thing. Stuff that normally gets called during the regular season goes unoticed in the playoffs. It has been that way since the beginning of time, and unfortunately next year, and the year after that, and so on, it will be the exact same thing. You dont have to agree with it, but it is what it is.

The refs let stuff go for both teams the entire series, and they were only going to call infractions that were blatant.

That my friend, is playoff hockey.

The key here is consistency. I'm fine with the "it's playoffs" mindset, they can let a lot of the things slide and I have no problem with that.

The issue is that after ignoring a lot of the stuff for multiple periods on both sides, they suddenly decide to change it up and make a call with 2 minutes left in a tight game.

Yes, Montreal was the better team and deserved to win the series, but it's tough to get past it once you get the short end of the stick for TWO games in a row.

 

[ThunderAlleyNomad]

I think I get it....but then again all we are good for is drinking beer and shoveling snow.



In all honesty, It is bitter sweet for me being a Habs fan. No teams fan base wants their team to win surrounded by controversy.

Also, Tampa deserved so much better considering what they fought through all season long to get to the playoffs, that it just doesnt seem right that they went out in 4 games.

You have a young team that have undoubtedly learned so much in these playoffs, that it can only get better moving forward.

Don't sell yourselves short. Maple syrup is also awesome.

 

[Godzilla]

it's just that's all I'm getting at. Clearly, the refs were letting the players play in that third period. Which is fine as long as there is consistency. It just leaves a bit of a bad taste in the mouth that, after 18 minutes of that, suddenly Paquette's getting nailed with a penalty.

Nothing that cost TB the game or the series because they lost those (and Montreal won those) on their own merits. Just strikes the funny bone when that call comes up out of complete obscurity.

The civil discussion is well appreciated on this end.

I completely understand. We felt that way last year in the playoffs as well, and it blows big time.

Just think of how awesome your team will be next season, and for many seasons to come. Its hard to see it now, but the future is bright for the Tampa Bay Lightning organisation

 

[Steve Yzerman]

I really dont mean this is an affront in any way, but are you new to playoff hockey? Are you aware of just how much the refs will let go during the playoffs vs the regular season?

I have been watching and playing hockey for 40 years, and every single season it is the same thing. Stuff that normally gets called during the regular season goes unoticed in the playoffs. It has been that way since the beginning of time, and unfortunately next year, and the year after that, and so on, it will be the exact same thing. You dont have to agree with it, but it is what it is.

The refs let stuff go for both teams the entire series, and they were only going to call infractions that were blatant.

That my friend, is playoff hockey.

I wonder if the same sentiment comes if the refs don't call anything against MTL's opponents (letting it go unnoticed) and then call something against MTL in the last two minutes of an elimination game which causes them to lose the series. It's obvious it doesn't.

 

[Godzilla]

Don't sell yourselves short. Maple syrup is also awesome.

Damn...I forgot about the syrup. It must be all that beer.

 

[Godzilla]

I wonder if the same sentiment comes if the refs don't call anything against MTL's opponents (letting it go unnoticed) and then call something against MTL in the last two minutes of an elimination game which causes them to lose the series. It's obvious it doesn't.

Very few fans can look at a game subjectively when it comes to their own team. Its what makes us passionate hockey fans. It doesnt always make us right, however.

 

[Shadow Journal]

The issue is that after ignoring a lot of the stuff for multiple periods on both sides, they suddenly decide to change it up and make a call with 2 minutes left in a tight game.

It wasn't that the suddenly changed their minds, it was that suddenly a blatant infraction lead to a turnover and a potential for a goal to be scored late in a tight game. I get why it's frustrating, but it's frustrating that no one seems to want to acknowledge this key difference between the call and all of the stuff prior that wasn't called.

I, and other Habs fans, have been arguing this point all over HF today, and no one seems to want to address it.

 

[Steve Yzerman]

It wasn't that the suddenly changed their minds, it was that suddenly a blatant infraction lead to a turnover and a potential for a goal to be scored late in a tight game. I get why it's frustrating, but it's frustrating that no one seems to want to acknowledge this key difference between the call and all of the stuff prior that wasn't called.

So running the goaltender is fine, but a trip is terrible? Is that the "key difference"?