22Brad Park
Registered User
The ref that called penalty on Lauzon was inside Bruins blueline when arm went up.Now penalty or not how in the hell can he see from there and be sure?This to me is a major flaw with how games are officiated.
Post-Game Talk: Game 56 - Bruins 4 Arizona 2 F - BEEP!! BEEP!!
- Thread starter Fenway
- Start date
BruinsFanSince94
The Perfect Fan ™
the part that baffled me was they even replayed it and still made the wrong call. They shouldve changed it to a 2min after reviewing it.
marchand looks pissed at the world out there.
so many mistakes and turnovers.
im prob in the minority but im worried about that top line getting frustrated in the playoffs.
so many mistakes and turnovers.
im prob in the minority but im worried about that top line getting frustrated in the playoffs.
BruinsFanSince94
The Perfect Fan ™
Absurdity
light switch connoisseur
- Jul 6, 2012
- 10,667
- 6,615
Honestly, I don't even know anymore. There have been countless hits where players have followed through on their checks where the principal point of contact was not the head, but the head did receive contact. Most of those did not result in suspensions. Blindside hits aren't always suspendable either based on prior rulings.
The hit could be deemed reckless given the amount of speed Lauzon had at the time of following through with a check, but it wasn't charging.
I guess elbowing someone in the head will only result in a penalty. I agree with Kassian's comments about the DOPS.
Honestly he deserves a game or 2 but so does Arizona's guy.
I'm not upset about the possible suspension but I'm pissed about the inconsistency of the refs.
BruinsFanSince94
The Perfect Fan ™
I think a game is more than fine. Stepan returned and while he caught chin, it didn't seem like he was going for the head. A bit blindsided but Crouse's hit on McAvoy was worse in all areas but he doesn't get anything.
I just don't understand how you can be this incompetent and never have to answer. This goes for both the officials and that mustached idiot Parros.
100% agree. No ill intent just too caught up in the moment and made a dumb split second choice.
Parros needs to be fired for his terrible job as do a few of these refs.
- Jan 29, 2003
- 25,475
- 20,905
Agree with almost everything.....still want another legit top 6 forward.
Don’t care who goes as long as the top 9 is better after the deadline.
- Jan 29, 2003
- 25,475
- 20,905
Agree with almost everything.....still want another legit top 6 forward.
Don’t care who goes as long as the top 9 is better after the deadline.
Absolute dog shit call from these f***ing joke refs. Kid finishes his check like he should, no malice or intent whatsoever. And all of a sudden he's kicked out. It's a f***ing disgrace.
missingchicklet
Registered User
- Jan 24, 2010
- 36,589
- 34,463
And to think the straight elbow to McAvoy's head with all the intent in the world has not been announced as having a hearing, yet player safety has scheduled a hearing with Lauzon, who hit the body as the primary point of contact. This is the kind of inconsistent bullshit that makes my foot inch closer and closer to walking out the door on this league. It's not like this kind of thing is rocket science when all the replays show what happened in both plays.
What really pisses me off is anyone who's played at a decent level can tell when shit is going down or is intentional & this wasn't even close. It was a total nothing play.
Hate to say it but i agree with the call on Lauzon and i think he deserves a game or two. Bad hit.
whatsbruin
Registered User
It is complete bs.
I don't watch non Bruins games, but i hear it happens to other teams as well, but it never happens to the other teams when they play the Bruins. B's get b.s. calls all the time. That call on Pasta, 3 or 4 years ago, when he clocked that NYR who was playing a puck out of the air, and got a similar crappy call and suspension.
BAD BOY
Registered User
The only thing that could be a concern is that Tampa is only five points behind with a game in hand . That of course will be two after tomorrow.
What difference did it make as they reviewed the hit
on replay. The replay thru the glass showed Lauzon
IMO grazing Stepans UB and making to much
contact with his head and neck.
I wasn't at all surprised he was tossed and texted that
right away.
Crouse's was even worse.
RussellmaniaKW
Registered User
- Sep 15, 2004
- 19,699
- 21,805
22Brad Park
Registered User
- Jan 29, 2003
- 25,475
- 20,905
Nice little run statistically since the break...
4 - 0
16 - 4 Goals
6 for 17 on the PP
4 - 0
16 - 4 Goals
6 for 17 on the PP
They didn't miss it. They saw it and gave Crouse just a minor for roughing. So we have two hits that make head contact - one sloppy and one intentional - and the reckless one gets a match penalty and the deliberate one just 2 mins.
I thought Lauzon's hit deserved 5 mins and, looking at it in isolation, I wouldn't think it unfair if he gets a one game suspension for it. But getting tossed plus a likely suspension verses 2 minutes for the other guy just isn't defensible. I find the league's approach really confusing. They make noises about wanting to protect players' heads, they prevent a lot of fights, every now and then they make an example of players who make head contact, and you think they'd want to be placing a premium on player safety to avoid potential lawsuits and negative press. But they're wildly inconsistent in how they police games. A lot of cheap shots and predatory hits get nothing, and a lot of nasty stuff is let go in the playoffs, especially if it suits the league in making games more competitive and 'exciting'. It's baffling.
