Post-Game Talk: Fly

3 Stars


  • Total voters
    89
Status
Not open for further replies.

TopShelfSnipes

Registered User
May 5, 2011
1,101
1,791
USA
They must have ruled that Kakko was in possession (by position) as he was shielding the puck when DeAngelo whacked him. Isn't there some off side rule that has similar possession of the puck logic? Maybe someone who knows the rules can chime in? This is an interesting one for sure :)

e: maybe even icing can be used here, they blow icing when the position is clear that the D will touch the puck first.
Puck wasn't going in if no one touched it and the penalty was committed on Kakko who was the one on the "breakaway" even if he didn't have clear possession of the puck. The rule is about the referee's discretion if a player commits a penalty that in his judgment prevents a goal with the net empty, which was clearly what this was - possession isn't a requirement. It'd be the same if a flat footed defenseman who was the last man back hacked down a full steam forward at the blue line with the puck behind him sitting in the slot and the net empty. And if I'm remembering correctly (it's been a while since the last time I referee'd a game, and these obscurities tend to fade over time), the referee is only allowed to make this call with the goalie pulled - I don't believe the rules allow for this with an "empty" net when the goalie is still there - even in the event of the goalie mishandling a puck at the circle, falling down out of the play, etc. and the D takes a penalty to save a goal.

Side note: Good to see Lindgren still get the assist. I've seen this rule called a few other times throughout decades of watching hockey, and it always used to be credited as an unassisted goal when called, which I always thought was stupid. I don't remember if this was possibly changed during a CBA, but good to see the assist get credited. It never made sense to auto give someone a goal but take away the assists from the players who rightfully earned them.

Last time I remember seeing this in a Ranger game, Nigel Dawes was awarded a goal probably about 15 years ago. There might've been another since but that's the last one that comes to mind.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Sisu4ever and CLW

Amazing Kreiderman

Registered User
Apr 11, 2011
44,872
40,409
How is that Lindgren’s goal? That’s on the Mount Rushmore of Kakko screwed.

They changed it back to Kakko now. For anyone interested... They initially gave it to Lindgren because Kakko never touched the puck but based on rule 25.1 on page 42 of the NHL rulebook, that's irrelevant.

Kakko was hooked, and based on that rule, he would in a normal situation have been awarded a penalty shot, not Lindgren. It's the direct scoring chance taken away that defines who gets it.

A few years ago they did change the rule slightly which probably caused the confusion because prior to, I think, 2019, it was based on having actual possession and control of the puck.
 

Attachments

  • Screenshot_20221218-082251.jpg
    Screenshot_20221218-082251.jpg
    211.5 KB · Views: 1

Chytilmania

Registered User
Dec 31, 2017
4,000
5,928
The Rangers had several highlight worthy goals. Even Vesey's goal would stand out in other games. Trouba's was great too, and that's aside from Miller's and Goodrow's breakaways.
I stopped watching for a bit, was waiting for them to get back on track so I may not have an accurate take but it seems like now we are scoring on odd man rushes/breakaways, cross ice passes like Goodrow to Panarin, whereas the beginning of the season we rarely had those chances.
 

Synergy27

F-A-C-G-C-E
Apr 27, 2004
13,309
11,767
Washington, D.C.
Flyers are barely an NHL team and we made it look very difficult , and the kids got no minutes.
I’m hesitant to wade into this aspect of the conversation, but people don’t seem to realize that there is no such thing as an easy game in the NHL. Unless we’re talking about the 80s Oilers, most NHL teams wouldn’t have an “easy” time beating most AHL teams. The margins are not that big in a game like hockey where goal scoring is rare and random.

Teams have off nights and get blown out, of course, but on an average day where both teams are playing at a normal level, it’s not going to look easy. Especially when a backup goalie is playing.

NHL teams even have a hard time against Swiss league teams.
 
  • Like
Reactions: FUZfan

Gordon Bombay

Remptar
Oct 13, 2006
2,421
2,802
I thought this was a great game. Would we like it to be pure domination? Sure but its a divisional matchup against a team that has to compete or they'll be benched.

Someone mentioned it before but Halak was so weird. Great saves and then trash goals. I think that's just what he is now, gotta hope for the great saves.

MANTIS.

That Trocheck line needs to stay together, for the love of god. That could be THE shutdown line in the league and there's more than enough talent to get goals.

Not gonna get worked up over the kid line this time. I thought they were good in their minutes, Chytil is becoming a force. He was a Hart poke check away from a highlight goal as well. Gotta give EdJo some credit too on Kravstov. He does a lot of subtle things that can go unnoticed that break up plays, keep plays alive, etc. Very smart player and needs to stay in the lineup.

Igor tonight. Trash team. Don't play down to them. 7 in a row, LFG
 

GENESISPuck94

Registered User
Sponsor
May 2, 2022
3,396
6,393
NJ
Kid line 11mins.
I don't want to sound like a debbie downer but wtf?
You're not being a Debbie Downer... you're being a realist. The organization has committed to scrubs winning mid-December games against lottery teams instead of developing its 1, 2, 9, and 21 overall picks. An organization that sent a letter out about being patient for a rebuild and rebuilding the right way, finally lands the kind of talent in the draft its always needed up front, and they're completely destroying those players' development so that Barclay Goodrow, Jimmy Vesey, and Vincent Trocheck can revitalize their careers and so that Panarin can be happy and so that Zibenjad and Kreider can remain butt buddies.

The difference between the Rangers and other organizations over the last 15 or so years like PIT (3 Cups), CHI (3 Cups), LAK (2 Cups), TBL (2 Cups), and soon to be on that repeater list COL... is that they committed fully to their top picks.

The Rangers will never learn and never get it through their bright lit Broadway brains.

1 Cup in 82 years, only 1 Cup in the modern era, and they still think their same bullshit is going to work. It's not. It hasn't. And it won't.

Since the letter the Rangers have ruined 4 top 10 forward picks.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad