TGDT: 3/9 Blackhawks @ Lightning 6:30PM CSN/VERSUS

[Chief Walking Stick]

You should have been pissed at Brouwer for the suicide pass!



I kid i kid.

 

[R K]

Well Willie border line charged but Toews did have the puck.



Either way I completely understand what you are saying but also completely understand why there was no suspension. Same with Ovechkin has he had JUST BEEN talked to a few weeks before about his reckless play.







As fo rthis thread the Officiating crew last night, who both really SUCK at their jobs should be suspended or fined.

 

[Ashor-redtribe]

Chara not being suspended but is in trouble with the Police on that hit..WTF!

 

[Chief Walking Stick]

Chara not being suspended but is in trouble with the Police on that hit..WTF!

He's not going to be in trouble with the police. There's no way any charges will be filed.

 

[supraman]

wording is vague. The puck definitely stops. So does St Pussy.

Puck stops he doesnt, he stops skating but he still is coasting. I agree the wording is vague.

 

[Ashor-redtribe]

Puck stops he doesnt, he stops skating but he still is coasting. I agree the wording is vague.

all this going back and forth doesn't change the fact that they took a point away from us and will not get it back..lets move on!

 

[MassHavoc]

The didn't take a point away from shit, there were several bad calls, but the fact is that the hawks were 0-3 in the shoot out. Who cares about the call they still didn't do enough to win.

 

[R K]

The didn't take a point away from shit, there were several bad calls, but the fact is that the hawks were 0-3 in the shoot out. Who cares about the call they still didn't do enough to win.

They cost us a 5 minute straight penalty. I tend to disagree the #2 PP in the league doesn't score on 5 minutes straight. Maybe more than once.



Tampa was 0-3 as well too Mass. Unless circus moves count. Which apparently I guess they do.



And to add these games are FAR TO IMPORTANT in this tight conference to allow someone to do their job half assed.



That point could actually cost a team now. That's fucking sad.

 

[MassHavoc]

They cost us a 5 minute straight penalty. I tend to disagree the #2 PP in the league doesn't score on 5 minutes straight. Maybe more than once.



Tampa was 0-3 as well too Mass. Unless circus moves count. Which apparently I guess they do.



And to add these games are FAR TO IMPORTANT in this tight conference to allow someone to do their job half assed.



That point could actually cost a team now. That's fucking sad.

Only reason we are talking about this so vilemently is because Hossa missed and the hawks lost. Hossa doesn't miss maybe sharpie puts one in, we'd already be onto the next game. The refs fucked up again yes. But they didn't score on the DOG, and St. Louis didn't make Hossa miss.

 

[R K]

Only reason we are talking about this so vilemently is because Hossa missed and the hawks lost. Hossa doesn't miss maybe sharpie puts one in, we'd already be onto the next game. The refs fucked up again yes. But they didn't score on the DOG, and St. Louis didn't make Hossa miss.

Maybe you. I mentioned the hit to the head with no 5 minute major in the chat and would still be talking about it now. Win or Loss.



How do you know we might have scored if not for the DOG? Hawks are great 4 on 4 but instead the first minute plus they were killing a penalty that should have never been called.



It's all relative.

 

[Ashor-redtribe]

Maybe you. I mentioned the hit to the head with no 5 minute major in the chat and would still be talking about it now. Win or Loss.



How do you know we might have scored if not for the DOG? Hawks are great 4 on 4 but instead the first minute plus they were killing a penalty that should have never been called.



It's all relative.

100% agree..if we were given the five minute major...who knows how many goals we could have scored because in a five minute you can score and still have your PP until it runs out, Im sure you all know that but that alone could have cost us the game. this is the second major that wasn't called. The one on Pisani and Bolly.

 

[LordKOTL]

Same thing as Chara... Ovechkin didn't mean to hurt Campbell. I know this Chara incident would garner much different reactions had it been Kane or Toews hit. We'd hear nothing about "boys will be boys" "hockey play" or anything like that.



All a part of being a fan of a team.

...and eventually someone on Montreal should attempt to put Chara into the 5th row. May not be that hard--there's video evidence of Sharpie hitting him down.



Intentional or not, if you play physical, you're going to have to answer the bell eventually. Now, pulling a Hextall on Chelios may not be wise, Or checking him into the turnbuckle like Chara either, but I'm sure that Scott, Bickell, Brouwer, Seabrook, etc. laying a clean, hard hit on Ovechkin a la Seabs on Cleary would be a nice way to say that payback is a *****--as long as it's legal and clean.



Oh, and Mitchell on Toews...Even Toews came out and said it was a legal hit. The same can't be said for Campbell.

 

[Chief Walking Stick]

...and eventually someone on Montreal should attempt to put Chara into the 5th row. May not be that hard--there's video evidence of Sharpie hitting him down.



Intentional or not, if you play physical, you're going to have to answer the bell eventually. Now, pulling a Hextall on Chelios may not be wise, Or checking him into the turnbuckle like Chara either, but I'm sure that Scott, Bickell, Brouwer, Seabrook, etc. laying a clean, hard hit on Ovechkin a la Seabs on Cleary would be a nice way to say that payback is a *****--as long as it's legal and clean.



Oh, and Mitchell on Toews...Even Toews came out and said it was a legal hit. The same can't be said for Campbell.

John Scott is going to get nowhere near Ovechkin with how slow he is. I'd like Seabrook given the options.

 

[LordKOTL]

I could dream, can't i?

 

[supraman]

John Scott is going to get nowhere near Ovechkin with how slow he is. I'd like Seabrook given the options.

Maybe the hawks could trap Ovie in the corner and when Scott shows up finally he can pummel the living piss out of him, see if he can make that gap tooth a bit wider.

 

[BiscuitintheBasket]

ok to the people who are posting in here saying that was a good goal, and are posting the rules...look at the replay yes he does a spin-o-ramma but then STOPS! STOPS! then handles the puck and then lifts it...stop acting like you are brain surgeons in here. The rule says you have to be in a skating torwards the goalie and can not stop! This league has more grey areas then the color grey. This is why this league is not covered by major sporting channels, and is run by a bunch of dumb fucks. You make a rule stand by it, don't ley shit slide because it looks pretty, and can cause a team standings, and possible missing the playoffs! Maybe Q will get an apology letter from Toronto and then he can whip his ass with it, then Craw can piss on it and then label it return to sender!

NHL

And the rule also stats that the act of a spin-o-rama is considered constant motion (nothing about the speed of the spin). Therein lies the conflict. I am not saying I agree with the rule, just pointing out the conflict and why it can be considered a good goal.

 

[MassHavoc]

And the rule also stats that the act of a spin-o-rama is considered constant motion (nothing about the speed of the spin). Therein lies the conflict. I am not saying I agree with the rule, just pointing out the conflict and why it can be considered a good goal.

But it could easily be argued that the act of the spin-o-rama stomped when his movement toward the goalie did and he STOPPED to set up another move. I have no problem with the rule as interpreted on some of the other spin-o-rama goals that led into the backhand shot. But this time it was used as merely a distraction to get the goalie out of position and then the real move occurred. If you take the spin o rama out and he just came across the goalie and pulled that move, I'd still say it was illegal, he was not skating forward but parallel and stopped the puck pulled it back and shot it.

 

[Ashor-redtribe]

And the rule also stats that the act of a spin-o-rama is considered constant motion (nothing about the speed of the spin). Therein lies the conflict. I am not saying I agree with the rule, just pointing out the conflict and why it can be considered a good goal.

The puck stopping alone which seems like everyone agreed that it did stop, should alone be a no goal. a puck is not allowed to stop and shot. all the other stuff mentioned is thrown out the window at that case alone.

 

[Ashor-redtribe]

all in favor of goalies tackling any player doing a spin-0-ramma in a S.O. say I.

 

[genefoley]

Crawford should've given him a shiver across the knee with his stick ala Bulin a few years ago.