Offical "Win or Ecuador" GDT - Rangers @ Penguins

by **68forever** on Sat Nov 25, 2006 9:27 pm

WHAAAAAT?????? asking Gonchar about getting the pp going and what they are doing differ. tonight and he says not forcing the puck on net and moving it more and they are doing better with that HUHHH did he understand the ? b/c they sure do know how to move it already put it on net

by **Stoosh** on Sat Nov 25, 2006 9:28 pm

i dunno, i thought it was kind of a fun coincidence

I was mostly being sarcastic...I thought it was actually kind of a neat thing, but it was the way Errey came across. Errey asked Crosby about it with the same tone of voice that a grandfather would use to address his five-year old grandson.

Website · by **dagny** on Sat Nov 25, 2006 9:29 pm

The plot thickens on that no goal by the rags. The ref went to the scorer's table and asked about a review. The ref was told they reviewed it upstairs, twice, and it was inconclusive. Rather than reviewing it some more, or in Toronto, the ref took their word for it and play continued. Had they taken more time, it would have been ruled a goal.

by **DelPen** on Sat Nov 25, 2006 9:32 pm

dagny wrote:The plot thickens on that no goal by the rags. The ref went to the scorer's table and asked about a review. The ref was told they reviewed it upstairs, twice, and it was inconclusive. Rather than reviewing it some more, or in Toronto, the ref took their word for it and play continued. Had they taken more time, it would have been ruled a goal.

The Rags guys also said since Walkom was in the building they don't even go to Toronto, it's done with him in the replay booth at the arena.

But the way they are going on about it it's like it's the first goal the Rags ever scored that got waived off where we were having one goal by Malkin per game for a while there.

by **Ron`** on Sat Nov 25, 2006 9:32 pm

Yeah, they were whining about that between the first and second too. Guess what, they dropped the puck and it's no goal. Still doesn't take away the fact that the Pens are out playing the Rangers 5on5. The scary thing is if we give them another pp. It's a 1-0 game and the Pens have some jump so far in the third.

by **Ron`** on Sat Nov 25, 2006 9:33 pm

good play by welch, took the hit, tapped it up for the man to clear it.

Website · by **dagny** on Sat Nov 25, 2006 9:36 pm

Holweg... meet Kharma. . .

by **DelPen** on Sat Nov 25, 2006 9:37 pm

I was just noticing the lack of calls this period and after watching Straka whack a Pen like Rex did in the first I realized they just stopped calling penalties, on both sides.

by **Ron`** on Sat Nov 25, 2006 9:37 pm

A while back someone was complaining about MAF playing the puck. That he doesn't do it enough. Well he should do it less in my opinion. He just set that whole Ranger pressure up by passing past his player to the Ranger point man. Only a good play by Talbot eventually bailed him out.

by **Jesse** on Sat Nov 25, 2006 9:37 pm

A lot of the Rangers goal's come from that central slot area in the middle between the circles.

The Penguins have been clogging that area all night and putting bodies in the way of passing lanes. They're getting their sticks on the puck and grinding it out.

Good to see.

Website · by **dagny** on Sat Nov 25, 2006 9:38 pm

DelPen wrote:
dagny wrote:The plot thickens on that no goal by the rags. The ref went to the scorer's table and asked about a review. The ref was told they reviewed it upstairs, twice, and it was inconclusive. Rather than reviewing it some more, or in Toronto, the ref took their word for it and play continued. Had they taken more time, it would have been ruled a goal.

The Rags guys also said since Walkom was in the building they don't even go to Toronto, it's done with him in the replay booth at the arena.

But the way they are going on about it it's like it's the first goal the Rags ever scored that got waived off where we were having one goal by Malkin per game for a while there.

Oh yeah... don't we know about disallowed goals. :lol:

Big reason why I can't gloat... plus, I believe in Kharma.

by **68forever** on Sat Nov 25, 2006 9:38 pm

dagny wrote:Holweg... meet Kharma. . .

not to complain but why was that not a penalty??? if that was Sid or one of our players we would be screaming foul. so can someone please explain to me why it wasn't called. Thank you.

by **Stoosh** on Sat Nov 25, 2006 9:39 pm

The quality of these CW broadcasts blow. I've got this coming in on a dish and for as grainy as it is, it might as well be coming in on a pair of rabbit ears or the old weathervane antenna that was still on our house when we bought it.

by **DelPen** on Sat Nov 25, 2006 9:41 pm

68forever wrote:
dagny wrote:Holweg... meet Kharma. . .

not to complain but why was that not a penalty??? if that was Sid or one of our players we would be screaming foul. so can someone please explain to me why it wasn't called. Thank you.

Because the refs blow, it goes both ways, this time we lucked out on their inetpness.

by **68forever** on Sat Nov 25, 2006 9:42 pm

dang another penalty, tough to take this late with so much time left. one is going to go in if the pens aren't careful here.

by **DelPen** on Sat Nov 25, 2006 9:42 pm

Ron` wrote:A while back someone was complaining about MAF playing the puck. That he doesn't do it enough. Well he should do it less in my opinion. He just set that whole Ranger pressure up by passing past his player to the Ranger point man. Only a good play by Talbot eventually bailed him out.

The new rule limiting goalies playing the puck has been a help to him.

by **68forever** on Sat Nov 25, 2006 9:42 pm

DelPen wrote:
68forever wrote:
dagny wrote:Holweg... meet Kharma. . .

not to complain but why was that not a penalty??? if that was Sid or one of our players we would be screaming foul. so can someone please explain to me why it wasn't called. Thank you.

Because the refs blow, it goes both ways, this time we lucked out on their inetpness.

OK i'll by that since i don't know any better.

by **Stoosh** on Sat Nov 25, 2006 9:45 pm

Fantastic PK by the Pens again.

by **Jesse** on Sat Nov 25, 2006 9:45 pm

Stellar PK by Colby and Joe.

by **Ron`** on Sat Nov 25, 2006 9:46 pm

Yes it was a good PK. Turn it up Pens, and keep the 5on5 edge going.

Website · by **dagny** on Sat Nov 25, 2006 9:49 pm

DelPen wrote:
68forever wrote:
dagny wrote:Holweg... meet Kharma. . .

not to complain but why was that not a penalty??? if that was Sid or one of our players we would be screaming foul. so can someone please explain to me why it wasn't called. Thank you.

Because the refs blow, it goes both ways, this time we lucked out on their inetpness.

It seems that they might have thought Holweg got hit by the puck. That's what the rags announcers thought until they replayed it. Refs didn't have the replay benefit.

Website · by **dagny** on Sat Nov 25, 2006 9:51 pm

Oh dear... Gonchar with the assist on Jagr's goal. :lol:

by **The U** on Sat Nov 25, 2006 9:51 pm

wow, Jagr is taking this game over. It's like he's the only guy on the ice.

by **Ron`** on Sat Nov 25, 2006 9:52 pm

How does Jagr come completely across the slot area and no on touches him. Bounces the puck off Gonchars skate right back to his own blade, goal Jagr. Come on Pens, don't let them take these points from you.

by **The U** on Sat Nov 25, 2006 9:52 pm

dagny wrote:Oh dear... Gonchar with the assist on Jagr's goal.

Every goal isnt somebody's fault. That was just a lucky deflection...puck fell into Jagrs lap and he had an empty net. Gonchar didnt do anything wrong.

Offical "Win or Ecuador" GDT - Rangers @ Penguins

Who is online