GDT: Around the League: Playoff Edition Part IV

[Drivesaitl]

Whatever somebodies opinion is its 3-0 in a game seven and the league influenced the result through a crap call. Putting one of the most dangerous offenses in the league in a beneficial situation against one of the league worst PK's. Whether Knights "deserved" the end result is immaterial. The NHL, once again, through its own incompetence, radically influenced an outcome, with a judgement call.

At worst, even in a botched call there the Knights get 1,2 minors for that. A major? That's a lol clownshow decision. This is probably the worst sporting call since the Womens Canadian goalie got called for a delay of game for holding onto the ball for 1osecs and awarding the Yanks a Free kick and then a Penalty kick after an equally inept hand call. This is arguably the worst call in major sports since that.

This one call, if the Sharks go onto win the cup once again colors that potential result. The NHL, through an inane major call contributed to the wrong team, that was dead in the water in this game, advancing.

 

[oobga]

To be fair, that ice time is exactly the kind of ice time that is there for Engelland to play.

Theodore isn’t at the level yet where he can play 30 minutes a game (assuming no OT) in all situations.

I personally see Engelland as a slightly better Gryba and that he should be on the 3rd pair wherever he is playing. His poor play is masked a lot by the speed of their forward group, but he's still there to burn you in key moments, like that PK, and the cup finals last year.

Agree with you somewhat though, this may be more the fault of management. They really need to find a more useful vet to play that role.

 

[Kepler 186f]

Eakin was gifted a high sticked goal, we cant forget that. It was fair reffing (or the fairest you can get)

If you give up 4 goals on a 5-minute powerplay, you deserve to get bounced, no ifs ands or buts. Every cup winner has found way to overcome the same sort of adversity

The absolute worst thing we could do is put in MORE review FFS. Refs are humans and not immune to mistakes. Its ok to have mistakes in sports. The one way to kill the buzz watching hockey is to have friggen 6 reviews each period to check in on a potential missed high stick. Offside reviews are already brutal enough, but thankfully only occur periodically. Penalty reviews would be an unmitigated disaster since they would occur all the time

To make this review idea fair they would not only have to review major penalties called, they would also need to review minor penalties to see if they should be majors and plays where no penalty was called to see if one should have been called. Especially if a goal is scored by the offending team. And a choice would need to be made on how long beforehand. 1 minute? 5, 10?

This review craze is going off the rails.

 

[5 Mins 4 Ftg]

The NHL doesn't need yet another review procedure, they need a common sense procedure when it comes to egregious officiating errors at key points in the game. College football has it. Every once in a blue moon a non-reviewable play does in fact get reviewed after a spotter or whoever calls down to the ref and basically says "you guys completely blew that call, go have a look and overturn it". That's all that needed to happen on that offside that was 2 feet offside and they could have avoided hundreds of ridiculous reviews that annoy everyone. And it's all that needed to happen here. Instead, San Jose has been advanced to round two on a ridiculous technicality, probably the worst blown call of the last decade. This is what happens when lawyers run sports leagues. "it's not technically in the rules to let the ref glance at the replay at the penalty box, so instead we'll make a mockery of the entire series and let the wrong team advance". Another black eye for common sense, and further loss of credibility for the NHL, who had very little to begin with.

When lawyers are involved in anything common sense goes right out the window. Happens in governments all the time.

 

[KeithIsActuallyBad]

To make this review idea fair they would not only have to review major penalties called, they would also need to review minor penalties to see if they should be majors and plays where no penalty was called to see if one should have been called. Especially if a goal is scored by the offending team. And a choice would need to be made on how long beforehand. 1 minute? 5, 10?

This review craze is going off the rails.

How many penalties per game would actually classify as majors? You only see one every 10 games or so.

 

[Kepler 186f]

How many penalties per game would actually classify as majors? You only see one every 10 games or so.

Well if they start reviewing all minors I'm sure there will be more majors.

And how many goals are scored per game? If we are going for fairness and taking ref error out of the game the lead-up to every goal would need to be reviewed to make sure no pick, interference, offside, icing or other call wasn't missed which lead to the goal.

Of course that still wouldn't clear up penalties that should have been called but weren't that stopped a goal from being scored.

More reviews are not the answer. It will never end. Look at the offside reviews. Goals can be called off even though the actual offside didn't really lead to the goal. The play may have been offside yet the puck may change hands a couple of times with a couple of failed clearances, yet the goal is still disallowed.

 

[Kyle McMahon]

3rd ref in the sky that can quickly review stuff and have radio contact with the refs on ice? That would be pretty helpful for these kinds of things. Refs and linemen huddle up and can get an accurate comment using replay from above that they can make a decision with. If it is really questionable, can call for guys on ice to look too.

Something like this, if they just ask, did the cross-check get him in the face? That would have been an easy no for someone with quick access to a reply to see.

Exactly. The guy was down on the ice for 5 minutes, it would have taken all of 10 seconds to have an eye-in-the-sky radio down and tell the ref what happened. Something like that would only occur very rarely anyway. As I said, it would only be to mitigate calls so ridiculously bad that it's an embarrassment to the league to let them stand. This wouldn't be for your run of the mill bad calls that happen all the time. The NFL put the wrong team into the Super Bowl, and the NHL has put the wrong team into the next playoff round. It's a once in a decade level of blown call, and completely needless in this day and age.

 

[HumanCheatCode]

This is arguably the worst call in major sports since that.

The New Orleans Saints would likely disagree with you on that one.

I didn't even think I liked the Knights, but man was i fired up watching that. The Sharks must have the most players in the league that you just want to punch in the face every time you see them.

 

[oXo Cube]

The New Orleans Saints would likely disagree with you on that one.

I didn't even think I liked the Knights, but man was i fired up watching that. The Sharks must have the most players in the league that you just want to punch in the face every time you see them.

The Sharks aren't even the most dislikeable team located in California.

Which is saying something because they're pretty gross.

 

[Kepler 186f]

Exactly. The guy was down on the ice for 5 minutes, it would have taken all of 10 seconds to have an eye-in-the-sky radio down and tell the ref what happened. Something like that would only occur very rarely anyway. As I said, it would only be to mitigate calls so ridiculously bad that it's an embarrassment to the league to let them stand. This wouldn't be for your run of the mill bad calls that happen all the time. The NFL put the wrong team into the Super Bowl, and the NHL has put the wrong team into the next playoff round. It's a once in a decade level of blown call, and completely needless in this day and age.

It was just a regular bad call until Vegas' PK fell apart and allowed 4 goals.

And who decides what is a ridiculously bad call vs a bad call vs a regular garden variety bad call.

And what do they do about horrifically bad missed calls?

 

[KeithIsActuallyBad]

The Sharks aren't even the most dislikeable team located in California.

Which is saying something because they're pretty gross.

They're third but it's not a very distant third. All three of those teams are jerkoffs.

 

[oXo Cube]

They're third but it's not a very distant third. All three of those teams are *******s.

This is all opinion of course, but for me it's:

1) Anaheim
2) Anaheim


4) Los Angeles
5) San Jose

 

[Kepler 186f]

This is all opinion of course, but for me it's:

1) Anaheim
2) Anaheim


4) Los Angeles
5) San Jose

I'd add the Ducks a 3rd time, but this works.

 

[trent_vinyl]

He was hurt because he lost his balance, was tripped up by Statsny and smacked his head against the ice. It was unfortunate for sure, but not a major. Just a freak accident.

Eakins wasn't the issue, but Stastny for driving him head down after, when he was prone & vulnerable from the first cross check, and not engaged in any type of hockey play. Watch how hard Stastny drove him down. Secondly, nailing a guy after first hit, when not engaged in play, teed up, off balance and vulnerable, has to be illegal and a major if causes injury

 

[Porkleaker]

Marchessault livid after game, drops F bomb lol

 

[Kyle McMahon]

It was just a regular bad call until Vegas' PK fell apart and allowed 4 goals.

And who decides what is a ridiculously bad call vs a bad call vs a regular garden variety bad call.

And what do they do about horrifically bad missed calls?

None of those questions need to have clear, defined answers and procedures attached to them. It's something that would only be invoked on rare occasions...like when a call in the third period of a game 7 is so bad that it is likely to unfairly determine the end result and cause total embarrassment to the entire sport.

I mean what happens if it's OT in game 7 of the final and Connor McDavid gets knocked out cold after being clubbed over the head by Auston Matthews. Every single person watching knows that Matthews will get a 20 game suspension for it, but somehow no ref actually saw it and no penalty gets called since it's unreviewable, and "rules are rules". Matthews scores the Cup winning goal on the next shift. Extreme example? Of course it is, but with no allowance for common sense to trump official procedure, it could theoretically happen. And given enough time, stuff even worse than what we witnessed last night will inevitably occur.

 

[Kepler 186f]

None of those questions need to have clear, defined answers and procedures attached to them. It's something that would only be invoked on rare occasions...like when a call in the third period of a game 7 is so bad that it is likely to unfairly determine the end result and cause total embarrassment to the entire sport.

I mean what happens if it's OT in game 7 of the final and Connor McDavid gets knocked out cold after being clubbed over the head by Auston Matthews. Every single person watching knows that Matthews will get a 20 game suspension for it, but somehow no ref actually saw it and no penalty gets called since it's unreviewable, and "rules are rules". Matthews scores the Cup winning goal on the next shift. Extreme example? Of course it is, but with no allowance for common sense to trump official procedure, it could theoretically happen. And given enough time, stuff even worse than what we witnessed last night will inevitably occur.

Yes they do need clear defined answers and procedures. Rules and regulations are useless unless they are clearly defined. Otherwise you are leaving the decision up to individual monitors. Which will lead to even further howling.

 

[Tobias Kahun]

This is all opinion of course, but for me it's:

1) Anaheim
2) Anaheim


4) Los Angeles
5) San Jose

Your opinion sucks, not enough Anaheim’s.

/s

 

[Kyle McMahon]

Yes they do need clear defined answers and procedures. Rules and regulations are useless unless they are clearly defined. Otherwise you are leaving the decision up to individual monitors. Which will lead to even further howling.

The only howling would be from the team that thought they got away with a huge undeserved advantage, and it would fall on deaf ears anyway. Absolutely nobody would be upset if the series supervisor sitting up in the press box radioed down to a ref on the ice to explain what happened on a play where a major injury occurred. Most wouldn't even be aware it (the call from above) occurred at all. Instead, we are treated to a panicked officiating crew just guessing, and guessing horribly wrong in this instance.

 

[Kepler 186f]

The only howling would be from the team that thought they got away with a huge undeserved advantage, and it would fall on deaf ears anyway. Absolutely nobody would be upset if the series supervisor sitting up in the press box radioed down to a ref on the ice to explain what happened on a play where a major injury occurred. Most wouldn't even be aware it (the call from above) occurred at all. Instead, we are treated to a panicked officiating crew just guessing, and guessing horribly wrong in this instance.

So only an injury call would be considered bad enough to be overridden?

How about an egregious pick that leads to the winning goal? Or someone getting injured with no call? An icing that was let go and directly lead to a winning goal?

Nobody would care about last nights call if Vegas wouldn't have fallen apart.

And you still haven't answered the need for a clear rule. That is vital.

 

[5 Mins 4 Ftg]

Marchessault livid after game, drops F bomb lol

I wanted to hear this question;

“Letting 4 goals in on a 5 minute major has only happened one other time in almost 9000 playoff games. That’s a 0.0001 percent chance. Why did your team lose its composure?”
(Then duck)

According to Gregor it’s only happened twice in league history in regular season as well.

Vegas’ meltdown was historic.

 

[Kyle McMahon]

So only an injury call would be considered bad enough to be overridden?

How about an egregious pick that leads to the winning goal? Or someone getting injured with no call? An icing that was let go and directly lead to a winning goal?

Nobody would care about last nights call if Vegas wouldn't have fallen apart.

And you still haven't answered the need for a clear rule. That is vital.

My whole point is that you don't have to write in a bunch more rules. Just use common sense on those rare occasions where following the rule book to the letter of the law leads to an outcome that damages the credibility of the entire sport. We're not talking about some bad judgement call that happened during the regular run of play. We're talking about a group of four officials huddled up and literally guessing at what happened instead of...gasp...letting them have a 10 second conversation with another official who actually knows what happened and just watched the replay. It's not hard at all to call the ref over to the penalty box...just say the clock ran an extra 5 seconds and needed to be adjusted or some BS if anyone actually questions why the ref ended up on a headset while Pavelski was down.

 

[5 Mins 4 Ftg]

Terry Jones is so out of touch. Time to call it a career man.

 

[Kepler 186f]

My whole point is that you don't have to write in a bunch more rules. Just use common sense on those rare occasions where following the rule book to the letter of the law leads to an outcome that damages the credibility of the entire sport. We're not talking about some bad judgement call that happened during the regular run of play. We're talking about a group of four officials huddled up and literally guessing at what happened instead of...gasp...letting them have a 10 second conversation with another official who actually knows what happened and just watched the replay. It's not hard at all to call the ref over to the penalty box...just say the clock ran an extra 5 seconds and needed to be adjusted or some BS if anyone actually questions why the ref ended up on a headset while Pavelski was down.

Common sense differs from one person to the next.

A hard fast rule is necessary. Leaving this type of decision up to the viewpoint of one individual or group of individuals is not viable.

And that is only answering this one case. Not all crap calls/non-calls leave a 10 minute window for on and off ice officials to have a chin wag. A non-call can be as if not more damaging than this one. Like a pick leading directly to a winning goal.

 

[TopShelfGloveSide]

If this is the rationale of the NHL they deserve what they get in terms of being considered a respective joke league amongst the major NA sports. A call ought to be based on what the actual infraction was, not what injury result culminated from the players own awkward fall. Pavelski slammed himself into the ice essentially. This is not a situation where he was concussed standing up, or knocked out and going down like a sack of potatoes (in that instance if there is a headshot that causes a player to lose motor control then yes the perpetrator should be responsible) But not for a hit like this wherein the injury is actually due to Pavelski's own fall, while being completely conscious.

My lord. One of the first things you ever hear when you lace up skates is if you fall don't fall straight backwards onto your head. Don't do that. Don't ever do that.

Alternately kids are taught;

1)Protect your head. If falling backwards just cradle your head with your arms/ hands, you'll be fine. Protect the head.

2) Simply bend over. While falling just bend your back, motion forward, go into a fetal, this makes it impossible to hit your head straight back.

3)Contort body on way down so you fall on side, but not directly backwards.

4)Fall on arms and break fall instead of falling back on head.

Any of the above or combination thereof completely mitigates injury in this circumstance.


What occurs to Pavelski there is simply due to his own bad fall. Not falling properly. How is that Eakins fault that Pavelski doesn't have the on ice sense that a preschooler would be taught regarding on ice safety?

You lecturing Pavelski about what to do on the ice is laughable.