WCF Game 3: Sharks @ Blues | 7:00 PM CT | NBCSN, CBC, SN, TVAS

[one2gamble]

Funny that you say that because I was assured that the nhl had better cameras when Colorado was made to wrongly lose a goal

Wasnt wrong

 

[Eldon Reid]

It wasn’t a pass.. he directed the puck to open ice. The San Jose player who got possession had to skate from beside / behind the net to get the puck.

He passed in front of the Blues goal. If the Blues go to touch the puck to negate it, all the Sharks have to do is put a stick, get a crazy bounce, and it will cause chaos in front of the Blues net and they could score off it.

Also Nyquist's skates are behind the goal line while his stick is out in front of the net.

It is a clear advantage.

 

[bluesfan94]

Wasnt wrong

Well sure, if you ignore Landeskog’s skate being on the line, it wasn’t wrong.

 

[Malbec Rules]

Berube is a great leader no doubt.. but when it comes down to it, he is in over his head against guys like Pete Deboer. Players “Running through a wall” for you only goes so far. SJ is the far more prepared team. St Louis does not understand situational hockey.. and no, you guys have no answer for Karlsson and Burns.

I’m a Sharks fan...but I don’t see them as “far more prepared” then the Blues. I think both teams have looked very unprepared at times, and really good at times. Its a very close series and I assume it will stay that way each game.

 

[Chabot84]

Keeping the puck isn’t an advantage? I mean, even if we ignore how the rule has always been called, this is a shockingly bad take.

I’m just interpreting the rule the way it was written. I watched the game and was in shock that the goal counted. You can even see the San Jose kinda hesitate before passing it to Karlsson like as if he expected the whistle to blow and then he passed it anyways and voila it’s a goal.

But just for the sake of argument the way that rule is written and now since the puck was technically directed to open ice and NyQuist was clearly behind / beside the net as the “pass” was made.. he had to skate and go get that puck. I mean advantage is subjective.. no one had possession St. Louis could have got that puck and cleared it and it would have been an advantage to them.

 

[masterofallxix]

Well sure, if you ignore Landeskog’s skate being on the line, it wasn’t wrong.

Well if you think Landeskog's skate was on the line, well my friend, you are quite wrong yourself.

 

[simon IC]

Fellow Blues fans, let's move on. Yeah, it was a bad call. So what. It shouldn't have gone to overtime in the first place. We let them back in the game. This team has proven it can handle adversity. I am going to deal with it the same way I hope the players do, dismiss it entirely, immediately, and move on to the next game. We are not going to lay down and die just because we were dealt a bad hand. Let's regroup and defeat them on the ice despite the officiating.

 

[bukwas]

That sure was an awful way to end what was otherwise an excellent game.
Oh well, at least the Blues look like a team that can shake off adversity and persevere.

 

[one2gamble]

Good question. Toronto should be reviewing it on the fly and the refs should have earpieces from them.

I get that but take this play , the hand pass is 3 steps back, but if you go back to the hand pass you're going to see a crosscheck and a trip. If you go back further there might be a pick or a hook. Hockey is like the butterfly effect. I don't know how you decide where to stop on some of these which is likely the nhls problem

 

[Kap-the-Head]

Sure. Sounds like a great idea. But that rule (to review all goals) doesn't exist right now, does it? So who's fault is it? Definitely not the Sharks. So you can't blame them and hate them for it. The NHL? Maybe...but complaining about the nhl NOW after the fact is immature. You can't change rules midseason. And keep in mind - a handful of years ago instant replay didn't even exist. Coaches challenges didn't even exist. We had to roll with what refs saw. Are we sure that there were no missed calls in the 1920's stanley cup championship game too??

I think fans are upset the Sharks did not demonstrate fair play and stop playing knowing it was a handpass.

 

[Instl]

And as a Sharks fan I agree. The NHL needs to fix it. But how much are you going to hate on the NHL for it? Rules are rules, and if things aren't properly written out - what can you possible do? If you want to boycott the NHL and stop following it - so be it. But at this point it is what it is - no rules were bent and no rules were broken. The Sharks won this game based on the rulebook of the NHL as it currently stands.

Again - does it need fixing? Yes absolutely. But it has needed fixing for decades. And it still isn't quite where it needs to be. You can be pissed and stop watching. Or you can roll with it and understand that changes will be made down the road to prevent unfortunate circumstances from happening. In the meantime, the players and teams need to play the way the rules are written.

The Sharks won the game due to the ineptitude of 4 officials on the ice. Any of those 4 can call a hand pass.
Like I said, it’s not the Sharks fault. Not like they would give the goal back. I know I wouldn’t.
I’m not boycotting but the NHL has had big problems this playoff season with the refs and they’re going to have to do something to improve it

 

[one2gamble]

Well sure, if you ignore Landeskog’s skate being on the line, it wasn’t wrong.

Like I said before, it was over ruled almost instantly. There was hardly a deliberation. It's not getting called back unless they were sure.

 

[Instl]

I get that but take this play , the hand pass is 3 steps back, but if you go back to the hand pass you're going to see a crosscheck and a trip. If you go back further there might be a pick or a hook. Hockey is like the butterfly effect. I don't know how you decide where to stop on some of these which is likely the nhls problem

I don’t think they review penalties but something like hand passes or pucks hit with a high stick should be Toronto’s call.

 

[Chabot84]

He passed in front of the Blues goal. If the Blues go to touch the puck to negate it, all the Sharks have to do is put a stick, get a crazy bounce, and it will cause chaos in front of the Blues net and they could score off it.

Also Nyquist's skates are behind the goal line while his stick is out in front of the net.

It is a clear advantage.

Adding that word “advantage” to the rules made it subjective and more of a judgement call. Hence why people can now have different opinions. I’m sure we can at least all agree that you know what I think it was a failed hand pass.. I think he tried to pass it to Karlsson.. and it failed and nyquist went and got it and passed it to Karlsson himself

But because he failed the hand pass.. he technically didn’t pass it to anybody it was just directed to open ice

 

[bluesfan94]

I’m just interpreting the rule the way it was written. I watched the game and was in shock that the goal counted. You can even see the San Jose kinda hesitate before passing it to Karlsson like as if he expected the whistle to blow and then he passed it anyways and voila it’s a goal.

But just for the sake of argument the way that rule is written and now since the puck was technically directed to open ice and NyQuist was clearly behind / beside the net as the “pass” was made.. he had to skate and go get that puck. I mean advantage is subjective.. no one had possession St. Louis could have got that puck and cleared it and it would have been an advantage to them.

Why does him being behind the net when the puck is hit keep him from gaining an advantage? Whether or not an advantage could have been prevented isn’t written into the rule. Only if an advantage is gained. It was gained because nyquist and the sharks retained possession of the puck in a good area of the ice.

 

[one2gamble]

I don’t think they review penalties but something like hand passes or pucks hit with a high stick should be Toronto’s call.

What's the difference when the penalty had as much if not more impact on see.of these plays. They don't review penalties or hand passes but if you want to get the calls right....

 

[FacePlate]

Because there were multiple trips all game, by both teams not called.

So ignoring a trip is cool but ignoring a guy waving his hand at the puck isn't. Got it.

 

[bluesfan94]

Well if you think Landeskog's skate was on the line, well my friend, you are quite wrong yourself.

I mean. It’s clearly inconclusive and I lean towards his skate being on the ice.

 

[Malbec Rules]

A hand pass, indirectly or not, is whistled down 100% of the time unless it’s in the defensive zone.

Agree...which makes it more believable that the refs and linesmen all just simply missed it. Its not a “bad call” as much as a missed call. Either way, bad way to lose a game for the Blues.

Changing gears...has anyone seen any update on Dunn? He got off the ice okay but then seemed really wobbly on the way to the locker room. Hope he’s okay.

 

[Eldon Reid]

Adding that word “advantage” to the rules made it subjective and more of a judgement call. Hence why people can now have different opinions. I’m sure we can at least all agree that you know what I think it was a failed hand pass.. I think he tried to pass it to Karlsson.. and it failed and nyquist went and got it and passed it to Karlsson himself

But because he failed the hand pass.. he technically didn’t pass it to anybody it was just directed to open ice

Ok get rid of advantage.

He played it with his hand towards the Blues goal.

The Blues can try to TAKE POSSESSION to negate it RIGHT IN FRONT OF THEIR NET or let the Sharks play it for a call.

If the Blues try to touch there are several Sharks in the area, all it takes is one crazy bounce off shin pad or a stick to an open player and game over.

Blues aren't playing that puck because it will cause chaos in front of the net.

 

[Chabot84]

This may be the dumbest interpretation of the rule ever.

#1 He batted the puck towards the Blues goal. To negate the hand pass Blues would have to touch with stick or something and they aren't doing that right in front of their net. If the Blues would have played that in front of their nets, they would be a bunch of morons for doing that.

#2 He batted it towards the goal. While yes Nyquist's skates are behind the goal line, his stick isn't. Meier hand passes the puck to dangerous area of the ice where Nyquist gets it (should have been blown dead here) and he passes the puck to way open Karlsson. (Clear Advantage for Them because Blues aren't going to touch it in front of their net with Sharks players all around them)

You can be rude if you want.. but that was NOT a pass to NyQuist. 100%. If he was trying to pass to anyone.. it was Karlsson.

The advantage thing to me is subjective. I mean it was directed to a dangerous area that’s for sure.

 

[Eldon Reid]

You can be rude if you want.. but that was NOT a pass to NyQuist. 100%. If he was trying to pass to anyone.. it was Karlsson.

Ok get rid of the word advantage.

He played it with his hand towards the Blues goal.

The Blues can try to TAKE POSSESSION to negate it RIGHT IN FRONT OF THEIR NET or let the Sharks play it for a call.

If the Blues try to touch there are several Sharks in the area, all it takes is one crazy bounce off shin pad or a stick to an open player and game over.

Blues aren't playing that puck because it will cause chaos in front of the net.

 

[masterofallxix]

I mean. It’s clearly inconclusive and I lean towards his skate being on the ice.

That's your opinion. This was ACTUALLY reviewed by the refs and Toronto. In their opinion it leaned towards it NOT being on the line. That entire discussion was completely pointless in my opinion because it was actually reviewed and in their opinion it was offsides. Based on the comments about that play on hfboards, half the people thought it was onsides and half thought it was offsides. If the league was part of the half that thought it was offsides - what can you do?!

Those who think that the NHL is rigged and wants the Sharks to advance - L.O.L. The league has man-crushes on players like MacKinnon, Crosby, Toews, Kane, McDavid, Kucherov, Stamkos. Not the west coast Burns, Pavelski, Couture....

 

[benedictTavares]

Both goalies had a terrible game

 

[bluesfan94]

That's your opinion. This was ACTUALLY reviewed by the refs and Toronto. In their opinion it leaned towards it NOT being on the line. That entire discussion was completely pointless in my opinion because it was actually reviewed and in their opinion it was offsides. Based on the comments about that play on hfboards, half the people thought it was onsides and half thought it was offsides. If the league was part of the half that thought it was offsides - what can you do?!

Those who think that the NHL is rigged and wants the Sharks to advance - L.O.L. The league has man-crushes on players like MacKinnon, Crosby, Toews, Kane, McDavid, Kucherov, Stamkos. Not the west coast Burns, Pavelski, Couture....

Opinion isn’t conclusive. And they want the sharks to play the bruins cause of elbow joe.