Series Talk: WCSF Vancouver Canucks vs Edmonton Oilers. (Series tied 3-3)

[Leonardo87]

Vancouver Canucks vs Edmonton Oilers
WCSF

***Mod notes***

We understand this will be an intense series filled with emotions. We ask that you refrain from personal attacks towards others members, fans, and cities.

If you feel someone is baiting or trolling you, please report it rather than reply. Thank you.​

Click to read more...

 

[Avsfan1921]

The refs had an off night. Right!

Just for a little more clarification, I think the NHL rushed their paid media explanation way to quickly.

The words in the rule state "jump into" NOT "jump" NOT "Jump up","Jump into" meaning motion towards the other player.

This call sets a precedent and now ALL players bracing themselves are now subject to a "charging" penalty.

In minor hockey this isn't called.

The NHL rule book reads like a legal document, there are few gray areas. This is not a gray area. The rule stipulates motion by the offending player. "Into" does not mean standing still.

The league did not have any issue with suspending Soucy after the game so why wasn't Kane for his deliberate cross check to the face of Myers that drew blood and again was witnessed by the entire viewing audience and those in attendance? Why have two ref's if they won't consult? There are 4 game managers on the ice every game.

This may be what Bettman's NHL calls;
"Game Management" not refereeing.

Time to have a league official around to explain these things and not have coaches and players getting fines or fired by trying to.

Is this satire or do you believe rule 42.1 says that? Because it doesn't.

42.1 Charging - A minor or major penalty shall be imposed on a player who skates, jumps into or charges an opponent in any manner.
Charging shall mean the actions of a player who, as a result of distance traveled, shall violently check an opponent in any manner. A “charge” may be the result of a check into the boards, into the goal frame or in open ice.

The jumping ONLY applies if the jump creates momentum that makes the hit violent. It fully relates to movement or distance traveled.

The call on the ice is unequivocally wrong. There is no way to read that and say a stationary player can commit charging, as the rule clearly refers to movement at every point. They could've maybe called elbowing if they really wanted to make a call, but charging isn't it.

If the ref believed jumping up with your back facing the player is charging then they shouldn't be reffing. It's OK for fans to not know the rulebook but for a ref that's literally their one job.

It would take them all of 30 minutes at most. But it might be enlightening to see how far game management goes.
A possible question;
"Were the officials told to watch out for ***** player because *****"
Target acquired.
"Watch out for ****" or "We are clamping down on hitting so call ****"
Target locked on.
"keep games under 2 1/2 hours so networks *****"
Target eliminated.

I am sure the concept of having all the officials call the same way but they aren't anyway. Are they ever chastised for blatant errors?

Conspiracy Theory?
Vancouver is the only team to prove a ref was intentionally throwing a game, is there payback for that?


You are very correct. That is why they have other penalties that cover those other possibilities.

Those refs should not game manage another game in the playoffs. They couldn't work together to get it right. They can use replays for blood injuries, or possible head shots

They don’t understand the difference between leaving your feet to jump into a hit and bracing for a hit. Pettersson didn’t “jump into” a hit, that’s where people don’t understand the rule

So you think the word "into" is there for no reason and the strict definition of what a charge is including distance traveled into a violent hit is irrelevant to the jump into?

You cannot jump into someone by jumping straight up, unless the person is falling from the sky towards you. I would 100% agree with you if Foegele was falling from the sky or hanging from the rafters. Then it's a dangerous play where Petey jumped at him for sure.

42.1 Charging - A minor or major penalty shall be imposed on a player who skates, jumps into or charges an opponent in any manner.
Charging shall mean the actions of a player who, as a result of distance traveled, shall violently check an opponent in any manner. A “charge” may be the result of a check into the boards, into the goal frame or in open ice.

At what point did Pettersson jump INTO or travel any distance but vertical?

All of these comments lamenting the “jumped into” portion of the rule
- The player is initiating a reverse hit
- the player leaves his feet prior to first contact.

How do you not interpret that as jumping into a hit? Forward momentum or no, he jumps to add leverage to his hit. That seems like what jumping into a hit would be to me.

View attachment 872211
Former NHL ref cheering for Edmonton

Don’t care in the slightest.

 

[TheUnusedCrayon]

Quite the historian…. Except that’s not true lol.

Rantanen got called for a reverse hit last year.

Was it called a charge?

 

[vadim sharifijanov]

that goal wasn’t on nurse but he didn’t help either. him getting caught out there instead of ekholm is the hockey gods benevolently giving us one back for the brainfart of us icing hronek and zad in the last minute of game five.

 

[Szechwan]

Vancouver took over in the 3rd. Props to them. Miller is beasting.

The 3rd, didn't they have like 18 shots in the 2nd?

 

[crazychimp]

Is this satire or do you believe rule 42.1 says that? Because it doesn't.

42.1 Charging - A minor or major penalty shall be imposed on a player who skates, jumps into or charges an opponent in any manner.
Charging shall mean the actions of a player who, as a result of distance traveled, shall violently check an opponent in any manner. A “charge” may be the result of a check into the boards, into the goal frame or in open ice.

The jumping ONLY applies if the jump creates momentum that makes the hit violent. It fully relates to movement or distance traveled.

The call on the ice is unequivocally wrong. There is no way to read that and say a stationary player can commit charging, as the rule clearly refers to movement at every point. They could've maybe called elbowing if they really wanted to make a call, but charging isn't it.

If the ref believed jumping up with your back facing the player is charging then they shouldn't be reffing. It's OK for fans to not know the rulebook but for a ref that's literally their one job.

“Violently”

Such a violent player EP40 is.

 

[Canucks LB]

Honestly, it still cracks me up that so many people in the media and Oilers fans thought it would be an easy series against a Rick tochett coached team.

 

[crazychimp]

Game 3 too.

I think the Oilers lost an 100% winnable game from Skinner

You can say the same for the Canucks on the other end too though with game 4 losing with 30 or so seconds left.

 

[JAK]

You can say the same for the Canucks on the other end too though with game 4 losing with 30 or so seconds left.

Every game is a winnable game until it's over and you lost. Fact.

 

[innitfam]

Charging is when a player:

1. Jumps to check an opponent.

Pretty simple. Dont jump and there is no call. I seriously dont get why people bitch about this. Pretty easy call to make for ref

Read the rule book.

 

[GOilers88]

"PdO PrInCeSseS"

"UnSuStAiNaBlE"

They do have this ridiculous ability to score a goal right at the end of a period, but beyond that they're playing really well, all without Thatcher Demko.

I do think it goes 7 games, but the Canucks have more than earned a tip of the cap from me.

 

[Brookbank]

Vegas was on a roll. Yet they got yesterday's game wrong

 

[TheOrganist]

The 3rd, didn't they have like 18 shots in the 2nd?

Ya, but it was a penalty filled period and there was a lot back of forth and both teams had chances. Vancouver exerted their will 5 on 5 in the 3rd and took over in my opinion. The go ahead goal seemed inevitable.

 

[JAK]

Ya, but it was a penalty filled period and there was a lot back of forth and both teams had chances. Vancouver exerted their will 5 on 5 in the 3rd and took over in my opinion. The go ahead goal seemed inevitable.

That's what usually happens for the PDO Fraud Canucks. We give the other team nothing in the third and pounce when we have a chance.

 

[MikeK]

I hope the Oilers team are dwelling on past games as much as Oilers fans here are. Will make it much easier for the Canucks in game 6.

At the end of the day, they Oilers are down 3-2. Many people here thought the Oilers were going to run away with this. The Canucks have shown all season long they're a top team in the league. This should be of no surprise to those who actually watch other teams play.

 

[crazychimp]

Read the rule book.

Exactly posting the rule partially isn’t the rule.

Also we’ve seen players jump at opposing players when skating forward being called, are there examples of similar hits like Pettersson’s? I still can’t find one. This literally has to be a first and in a playoff game no less.

Maybe the fans in here that agree it’s a penalty can help me find a similar example.

 

[MrHeiskanen]

Last time I checked, players are entitled to their ice. Stationary inference is allowed for example. So why can't one jump in place? Makes no sense.

Also, Miro Heiskanen jumps about 50% of the time when receiving checks from the opposition forecheck behind the net. How come he isn't called for charging about 5 times a game?

 

[D0ctorCool]

I'm not afraid to say that I had the Oilers in 6. It's one thing for Silovs to surprise everyone and shut down the Preds, but I really thought the Oilers would have his number. That's not to say that the series is over, but my prediction certainly is.

 

[WetcoastOrca]

There’s no point in playing the ‘what if’ game.
Sure if Skinner had given the Oilers average goaltending they might be leading.
But then if Ian Cole hadn’t scored six goals for them the series might be over already.
Overall, I think 3-2 for the Canucks is fairly representative of the series so far. But the Oilers are far from out of it.

 

[Zanon]

These one-goal games have been hard on my heart. 9 in a row now for the Canucks.

I had the Oilers winning this series in 6. I’ll be disappointed now if the Canucks lose it.

 

[Avsfan1921]

Was it called a charge?

In the interest of arguing in good faith, I do not recall. I spent the last 10 mins or so trying to find it to confirm but did not and that is all the time I am willing to spend searching. I’ll concede and take an L here.

Having said that, the driving point is calling out that it’s “never been called in history”. So in rebuttal I’d say “has it ever been called before?” to which I’ll undoubtedly get “not that I’ve ever seen” and we’re right back to the merry-go-round.

 

[WetcoastOrca]

These one-goal games have been hard on my heart. 9 in a row now for the Canucks.

The young players are learning how to play under pressure which is good.
But the fans have aged a decade already!

 

[Lawzy]

aman and podkolzin 100% played much better than who the Canucks ran in game 4. They have a ton of gritty depth that works out a ton. Shoutout to Aman btw, love that kid.

Podkolzin is built for the playoffs. One of the rare times I disagree with Tocchet (him sitting games 1-5). I'm sure he had his reasons.

 

[Nuck Bonino]

NHL sent him out last time the Oilers needed him, wouldn't surprise me to see him do Game 6 and 7

as if we needed any more proof that this league is rigged

 

[JAK]

as if we needed any more proof that this league is rigged

Gary Bettman: But we already let you guys see Campbell's emails......

 

[ziploc]

These one-goal games have been hard on my heart. 9 in a row now for the Canucks.

I had the Oilers winning this series in 6. I’ll be disappointed now if the Canucks lose it.

It would be pleasant to win one 6-1 or something for sure. But they are showing their ability to stay in every game and to win a majority of them. That's been the MO all season. No idea if they can carry it on through this round or even another, but it's been a good ride.