Toydarian
Registered User
- Jun 2, 2009
- 2,732
- 2
A team leading 3-1 doesn't lose if the other team makes it 3-2 in the last few minutes.
Also, I think a Shoot Out is an absolute JOKE way for an elimination game to be decided.
In Sweden referees takes a lot of crap. Inconsistent refereing is happening in almost every game (letting a lot of things slide an all of a sudden making a really weak call), annoying the hell out of players and fans. Not saying its ok to bash the referees, but that´s how it is.
Once again its a clash of cultures. We say what we feel. And we dont expect anyone to hold back just because of some principle that says you have to. Of course there are limits (it´s of course not ok to do like Forsberg in that video for example), but lets just say those limits are far from the north american once.
Last edited:
You are right, I guess what's most funny is that I believe Forsberg is actually crying and the fact that he hates loosing so much.
Forsberg has one of the strongest winner instincts I ever have witnessed. Turning many games around on his own when being upset or desperately trying to win.
He was very young here, even the referee has officially forgiven him (it took a while though), you should too. ;-)
Lehner is young too, he will mature but he will hopefully keep is strong winning instinct, just like Forsberg did.
Last edited:
The question is - Has Forsberg forgiven Borje (the ref)?
Yes, a little bit anyway? ;-) In this clip both Forsberg and the referee (Börje) is talking about what happened, looking back. It's pretty funny.
Forsberg hardly remember (or still trying to forget?), I guess he was "in the zone"? ;-)
HC Ref
Registered User
- Jan 4, 2011
- 18
- 0
The linesmen - both North-American - did what they were trained to do. That is, they waved off the icing when they saw the defending player not make an attempt to play the puck.
As someone who has not watched all the games in the tournament, my question is was this call consistent with other potential icing situations?
If they have been calling it the same throughout, this should be a non-issue. However, if they usually would call the icing per international standards, but for some reason they instinctively reverted to the North-American standard in this instance and waved it off, then the Swedish confusion is understandable.
Either way, any high-level goaltender should know it is the front linesman (always posted at his own blue line, diagonally opposite to the back linesman) who has final say on whether or not to wave an icing.
As someone who has not watched all the games in the tournament, my question is was this call consistent with other potential icing situations?
If they have been calling it the same throughout, this should be a non-issue. However, if they usually would call the icing per international standards, but for some reason they instinctively reverted to the North-American standard in this instance and waved it off, then the Swedish confusion is understandable.
Either way, any high-level goaltender should know it is the front linesman (always posted at his own blue line, diagonally opposite to the back linesman) who has final say on whether or not to wave an icing.
67Cup
Registered User
- Sep 16, 2005
- 3,897
- 708
There are a number of different issues being jammed together here. Separating them might help.
1. Was the icing a bad call? Probably, though the question of whether the Swedish defender tried hard enough for the puck is relevant here. Still, I will go with Bob McKenzie on this one.
2. Did the linesmen wave it off visibly? Yes, although, unluckily for Lehner, it was the linesman who was not in the direct line of sight that did so.
3. Should the Swedes have played to the whistle? Absolutely. And all credit to the Swedish posters who acknowledge this.
4. Did this decide the game? No, the Swedes had every opportunity to win the game as it was. But it doesn't help to give up a goal on a dubious call in a game that goes to a shootout. If this were my team, I would be *&*+ed too! To give an NHL example, like most Leaf fans, I have never forgiven Kerry Fraser!
5. Should Lehner have made the remark about Canada in the postgame interview? No, clearly not. It was irrelevant and unnecessary and also mistaken. The missed headshot in which DeHaan's facemask was cracked and the high sticking penalty given to Canada when the US defender whacked his own goalie shows that they, like everybody else, can be victims of bad calls from time to time. At a guess, the Swedish coaches were using a "Canada gets all the breaks" line to motivate their players and it slipped out the mouth of a disappointed 19 year old at the wrong moment.
By the way, Tak to Sweden for a wonderful summer vacation a few years ago, that had nothing to do with hockey. The interesting thing is how much alike Sweden and much of Canada actually are in their geography... and in their passion for hockey.
1. Was the icing a bad call? Probably, though the question of whether the Swedish defender tried hard enough for the puck is relevant here. Still, I will go with Bob McKenzie on this one.
2. Did the linesmen wave it off visibly? Yes, although, unluckily for Lehner, it was the linesman who was not in the direct line of sight that did so.
3. Should the Swedes have played to the whistle? Absolutely. And all credit to the Swedish posters who acknowledge this.
4. Did this decide the game? No, the Swedes had every opportunity to win the game as it was. But it doesn't help to give up a goal on a dubious call in a game that goes to a shootout. If this were my team, I would be *&*+ed too! To give an NHL example, like most Leaf fans, I have never forgiven Kerry Fraser!
5. Should Lehner have made the remark about Canada in the postgame interview? No, clearly not. It was irrelevant and unnecessary and also mistaken. The missed headshot in which DeHaan's facemask was cracked and the high sticking penalty given to Canada when the US defender whacked his own goalie shows that they, like everybody else, can be victims of bad calls from time to time. At a guess, the Swedish coaches were using a "Canada gets all the breaks" line to motivate their players and it slipped out the mouth of a disappointed 19 year old at the wrong moment.
By the way, Tak to Sweden for a wonderful summer vacation a few years ago, that had nothing to do with hockey. The interesting thing is how much alike Sweden and much of Canada actually are in their geography... and in their passion for hockey.
Evil Romano
Registered User
You are completely right. It feels good to have a fellow "quasiconspiracist" - which is what we would be referred to as - regarding this issue. The Canadian Hockey Association, which we know has great influence on the very regulatory system, evidently has a substantial veto when it comes to decisions and Hockey-related dittos. As always, money controls the market - Canada is Croesus, and whereas the Hockey Industry more or less is run by the Canadians. Of course this does not mean they can infest the "system" with their cheap tricks (that would be too obvious) but they can clearly use their political power to twist and bend; to make it more comfy for them. That is, they can give other nations ultimatums and a taste of the "Canadian force" - the communion which number one priority is to benefit Canada, not the tournament itself, at this annual event. Frankly this does not involve the "Real WJC" as much anymore, but mostly the World Juniors. Needless to say it is still fascism.
Aaaaaaaaaaaaa
Registered User
- May 16, 2009
- 12,252
- 1,585
Evil Romano
Registered User
Oh no! Someone has uncovered our plan!
Ryan, Terry, Bill - call "Mr. H." He needs to know we've been discovered! Everyone - to the lair at once!
Someone tell Sidney Crosby not to show his robotic legs to anyone, and keep Don Cherry off the air. His codes will be cracked before we know it!
Oh, and don't forget to buy the beer on your way over.
Unfortunately for you, you are not even the slightest involved. You do not hold the power. So calling this your plan is a stretch.
And I see you're trying to banter and caricature the facts by going way OT - but that is what's expected. Sidney Crosby has nothing to do with the Canadian Association, more than the mafiosis at the hegemonic communion probably swear allegiance to his pseudobeard and mustache. You try to "conspirafy" the issue rather than look at the facts; that Canada has influential power. You are denying this? Where your debunking tool...
Unfortunately for you, you are not even the slightest involved. You do not hold the power. So calling this your plan is a stretch.
And I see you're trying to banter and caricature the facts by going way OT - but that is what's expected. Sidney Crosby has nothing to do with the Canadian Association, more than the mafiosis at the hegemonic communion probably swear allegiance to his pseudobeard and mustache. You try to "conspirafy" the issue rather than look at the facts; that Canada has influential power. You are denying this? Where your debunking tool...
Aaaaaaaaaaaaa
Registered User
- May 16, 2009
- 12,252
- 1,585
Unfortunately for you, you are not even the slightest involved. You do not hold the power. So calling this your plan is a stretch.
And I see you're trying to banter and caricature the facts by going way OT - but that is what's expected. Sidney Crosby has nothing to do with the Canadian Association, more than the mafiosis at the hegemonic communion probably swear allegiance to his pseudobeard and mustache. You try to "conspirafy" the issue rather than look at the facts; that Canada has influential power. You are denying this? Where your debunking tool...
I lol'ed throughout this. Thanks for the read.
Markable89
Registered User
Unfortunately for you, you are not even the slightest involved. You do not hold the power. So calling this your plan is a stretch.
And I see you're trying to banter and caricature the facts by going way OT - but that is what's expected. Sidney Crosby has nothing to do with the Canadian Association, more than the mafiosis at the hegemonic communion probably swear allegiance to his pseudobeard and mustache. You try to "conspirafy" the issue rather than look at the facts; that Canada has influential power. You are denying this? Where your debunking tool...
Funny....in Canada I know many people who believe the IIHF favours European teams....
When I watch an Oilers/Flames game, me and the Flames fan view the quality of the reffing in very different lights.
Maybe its time to just accept that refs try to be impartial and call the game according to the rulebook....but every so often make mistakes...(impossible!?
).. Wait, that doesnt make sense. You're right, its Canadas influential power that helps us, we throw in the odd bad call our way just so no one gets suspicious 
.
67Cup
Registered User
- Sep 16, 2005
- 3,897
- 708
I understand that you don't speak or write English very well but, honestly, this is strange, strange stuff, as is your reference to "mafiosi" in another post. We're talking hockey here and, to be more specific, a dubious icing call! What language do you have left over for brutal dictators and criminal gangs if you use words like that for a hockey game??? And "communion" usually means the equivalent of "mass" or "eucharist" in English. It is most commonly used in religious contexts, eg, the "Anglican Communion." What has that got to do with a teenager making an ill-judged comment after a disappointing game??? Please develop a sense of proportion and get a grip on reality, man!
Stanley Foobrick
Clockwork Blue
Dangerously
, it barely gets the corner of the full circular crease. Yes he has to go follow the puck closely for any bad bounces but there are better ways to cover your net from 190 foot shots than dropping to both knees in a position that doesn't allow you to play the puck.Still strange he doesn't seem to upset after the goal...it's not till after the lose that the play bothers him.
Markable89
Registered User
Markable89
Registered User
Yes they called it off after they felt there was no attempt to play the puck. I don't agree with the judgement myself but they clearly called it no icing on the ice. If thats not enough it should be pretty obvious by the time the puck hits the goaline and icing isnt called that it has been waived off.
SurMartin
Registered User
Atleast that is what Lehner and the defenders said. But I honestly don't see why people keep this up, we all agree it was mostly our own defencemens fault.
Evil Romano
Registered User
I am sorry to disappoint you but yes, I am an American. My heritage however, as well as my folks, is Albanian; hence the Albanian flag. And for the record - the choice of "communion" was supposed to be rather extreme, to make a point. But I suppose you are too illiterate to detect when someone is using "extreme" words to fuel the very signification of the point.
So no, you don't understand anything.
Waving off the icing was the correct call. #4 for Sweden could have played the puck but choose not too. It was a good call.
The exact same situations were then called icing for both teams, the refs weren't consistant at all. Of course it gets confusing for the players.
67Cup
Registered User
- Sep 16, 2005
- 3,897
- 708
American, Albanian or Andorran, you don't communicate very well in English. And that comes from a person who is professionally qualified to make the judgment. But, since you say that you are an American, you will probably understand the cultural implications of this: "How is your tinfoil hat these days? Are those black helicopters still tailing you?"
I repeat: Develop a sense of proportion and get a grip on reality.
Take the last word if you want: I'm done with you.
Ad
Upcoming events
-
-
-
2024 NHL Draft Lottery Team that wins #1 pick - PICK ONLY ONE TEAMWagers: 10Staked: $12,250.00Event closes- Updated: