TGDT: WCF Game 1 - 5/18 Kings (0) vs. (0) Blackhawks 2:00PM NBC

[Shantz My Pants]

Sounds like they played well. Missed the game due to coaching in a tournament. Hopefully now that spring session is over I don't miss too many more games....

 

[Chief Walking Stick]

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Trev" data-cid="230062" data-time="1400465220">
<div>


Sounds like they played well. Missed the game due to coaching in a tournament. Hopefully now that spring session is over I don't miss too many more games....</p>
</div>
</blockquote>


 </p>


You and Pez going to share the Jack Adams next year?</p>

 

[PatrickShart]

Every Q needs a Kompon

 

[Pez68]

I don't even know what to say about the officiating at this point. It's nauseating.

 

[Tater]

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="pmxzus" data-cid="230055" data-time="1400449679">
<div>


And I have no idea what icing is anymore</p>
</div>
</blockquote>


 </p>


Same here, they just make it up as it goes along. This is why I hated no touch icing even before it was implemented. WAAAAY too much discretion for the refs now.</p>


 </p>
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="The Mule" data-cid="230056" data-time="1400449764">
<div>


http://twitpic.com/e45u7l</p>
</div>
</blockquote>


 </p>


Thank you so much for posting this. As a Hoss fan it was a huge highlight for me. Knocked him off his feet.</p>

 

[cplmac]

I was waiting for our make up call for taking away the Toews goal and not only did it never come they continued to call one of the worst games of our post season.  I really hope this doesn't continue, 5-5 hockey in the finals is hard enough, 5-8 is damn near impossible.</p>

 

[roshinaya]

http://www.nhl.com/ice/blogpost.htm?id=29452&navid=DL|NHL|home</p>


 </p>
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote">


 </p>


 </p>
<span style="color:rgb(0,0,0);font-family:verdana;font-size:12px;">At 3:22 of the second period in the </span>Los Angeles Kings<span style="color:rgb(0,0,0);font-family:verdana;font-size:12px;">/</span>Chicago Blackhawks<span style="color:rgb(0,0,0);font-family:verdana;font-size:12px;"> game, the referee consulted video review to see if </span>Jonathan Toews<span style="color:rgb(0,0,0);font-family:verdana;font-size:12px;">' initial shot entered the Los Angeles net. It was determined Toews' initial shot did not enter the net. The referee's original call on the ice was "good goal" but a discussion between the on-ice officials resulted in a "no goal" decision because Toews made incidental contact with Kings goaltender </span>Jonathan Quick<span style="color:rgb(0,0,0);font-family:verdana;font-size:12px;"> before the puck crossed the goal line. This is not a reviewable play therefore the decision on the ice stands - no goal and no penalty.</span></blockquote>


 </p>


What is this BS. Consulted video review, but the play is not reviewable. Initial call is good goal, but decision on ice stands, which is no goal. Whaaaat?</p>

 

[Chief Walking Stick]

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="roshinaya" data-cid="230068" data-time="1400480627">
<div>


http://www.nhl.com/ice/blogpost.htm?id=29452&navid=DL|NHL|home</p>


 </p>


 </p>


What is this BS. Consulted video review, but the play is not reviewable. Initial call is good goal, but decision on ice stands, which is no goal. Whaaaat?</p>
</div>
</blockquote>


 </p>


THey just shot themselves in the foot there.</p>


 </p>


However... how I understand it is... incidental contact with a goaltender is reviewable and also different than goaltender interference.</p>

 

[roshinaya]

The NHL need to get these goalie interference rules and what's reviewable things sorted with as little ambiguity as possible. First would be to make any situation where the puck goes in the goal a reviewable play, be it from an offside play to the puck falling on the ice after hitting the netting.</p>

 

[Variable]

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="roshinaya" data-cid="230068" data-time="1400480627">

http://www.nhl.com/ice/blogpost.htm?id=29452&navid=DL|NHL|home



What is this BS. Consulted video review, but the play is not reviewable. Initial call is good goal, but decision on ice stands, which is no goal. Whaaaat?</p></blockquote>


They say that before they went to review, they discussed and changed the initial call on the ice to no goal. They just didn't tell the coaches. Or they're lying. One of the two. Either way, its something that definitely needs changing.

 

[PatrickShart]

They just needed to play their individual roles in the larger game. What's that saying? Eighty percent of playoff goals are showing up in front of the net</p>


 </p>


"I need to start doing that more," the 21-year-old Saad said. "I can get goals different types of ways. I think getting to the net in the playoffs is how they're going to come." (per ESPN Article)</p>


 </p>


He Saad...no shit you need to go to the net in the playoffs.  Maybe Sharp will now try this....not every goal is going to be a top corner snap shot or on a rush</p>

 

[PatrickShart]

Son of a *****</p>


 </p>


The Kings are now +240 to win the series...Hawks -300</p>


 </p>


I should have waited</p>

 

[mikita's helmet]

Hossa has 13 points in 13 games this playoff.  Like to see a few more goals, otherwise he's having a great playoff.</p>

 

[LordKOTL]

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Mikita's Helmet" data-cid="230103" data-time="1400517621">
<div>


Hossa has 13 points in 13 games this playoff.  Like to see a few more goals, otherwise he's having a great playoff.</p>
</div>
</blockquote>


More goals would be nice, but he is putting up points on good plays, and not just lame secondary assists where he touched the puck aeons ago.</p>


 </p>


Kudos to Bollig for drawing the penalty by going down a bit easy.  Also Kudos for outplaying Versteeg.  I swear Verschizophrenic has multiple personality disorder-some days he plays like the Versteeg we know, and some days he plays like Curtis Brown.</p>


 </p>


I'm still in awe as to how the smeg they called that goal back--I was under the impression that if a player was pushed into the goalie (and Voynov's hand was so far into Toews' asscrack that McGuire probably milmed his kex watching the replay) that any contact did not blow the play dead and the goal should be good, but I could be wrong.  Either way in the long term the 'hawks played it right--get it back in a fashion that neither the eunuchs on the ice or the felchers in Toronto can call back, and they did.</p>


 </p>


Onto Game 2 on Wednesday...Hopefully Shaw is back, Regin stays in, and as for the list 4th liner...pick your poison.  There's arguments for/against Bollig, Morin, Nordstrom, and Versteeg that it really shouldn't matter.</p>

 

[Chief Walking Stick]

</p>

 

[Chief Walking Stick]

</p>

</p>

 

[mikita's helmet]

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Grimsäväinen" data-cid="230124" data-time="1400535868">
<div>

</p>
</div>
</blockquote>


What goes around comes around.</p>

 

[MassHavoc]

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Grimsäväinen" data-cid="230124" data-time="1400535868">
<div>

</p>
</div>
</blockquote>


Hossa left his feet and launched into Brown. Suspend him the rest of the year and 10 games next year.</p>

 

[Chief Walking Stick]

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="MassHavoc" data-cid="230128" data-time="1400536481">
<div>


Hossa left his feet and launched into Brown. Suspend him the rest of the year and 10 games next year.</p>
</div>
</blockquote>


 </p>


No, stupid.  It was in the designated hitting area behind the net.</p>

 

[Shantz My Pants]

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Grimsäväinen" data-cid="230063" data-time="1400465817">


You and Pez going to share the Jack Adams next year?</p></blockquote>


No, cause I win 'ships.