Moderators: Three Stars, dagny, pfim, netwolf


Mad City Mike wrote:
NO-TOUCH ICING: A. After seeing the abominable call near the end where Pitkanen dummied the play and the buffoon linesman bought it, I am convinced we just need to take all judgment away from the clowns in stripes. Their horrendous call pretty much gave the Flyers the tying goal. I commented at the time that one complaint of new fans is they don’t understand the rules. How the hell can they, when veteran fans don’t even understand how the rules are applied?

MWB wrote:Mad City Mike wrote:
NO-TOUCH ICING: A. After seeing the abominable call near the end where Pitkanen dummied the play and the buffoon linesman bought it, I am convinced we just need to take all judgment away from the clowns in stripes. Their horrendous call pretty much gave the Flyers the tying goal. I commented at the time that one complaint of new fans is they don’t understand the rules. How the hell can they, when veteran fans don’t even understand how the rules are applied?
Question about this.... If there was no-touch icing, wouldn't that still have been an icing call? Isn't there still a judgment that has to be made by the ref? Just curious as to how that works.

DelPen wrote:If I had to bet money it would be the Leafs. They have a lot of young defensemen in their system and the Flyers biggest need is some defensemen down the road.

MarioLemieux1992 wrote:It seems he has been in a slump since that habs game now, good to see we can win without him, but it would be better to win with himMad City Mike wrote:SIDNEY CROSBY: D. Would have been an F except for the shootout winner. Terrible game by him. He was only credited with three giveaways, but there were many more where he made bad passes. Just not his night.

Pitts wrote:MarioLemieux1992 wrote:It seems he has been in a slump since that habs game now, good to see we can win without him, but it would be better to win with himMad City Mike wrote:SIDNEY CROSBY: D. Would have been an F except for the shootout winner. Terrible game by him. He was only credited with three giveaways, but there were many more where he made bad passes. Just not his night.
I think he's tired. And, if he's this tired right now, it doesn't look good for that over-loaded schedule in March. If need be, they may need to give him a night or two off soon.

DelPen wrote:Pitts wrote:MarioLemieux1992 wrote:It seems he has been in a slump since that habs game now, good to see we can win without him, but it would be better to win with himMad City Mike wrote:SIDNEY CROSBY: D. Would have been an F except for the shootout winner. Terrible game by him. He was only credited with three giveaways, but there were many more where he made bad passes. Just not his night.
I think he's tired. And, if he's this tired right now, it doesn't look good for that over-loaded schedule in March. If need be, they may need to give him a night or two off soon.
So you mean Bret Hull's idea of playing him 27 minutes a night wasn't a good one?

Mad City Mike wrote:BUFFOONS IN STRIPES: F. Yet again. Someday they will call a good game, but it likely won’t be in my lifetime. If somebody can explain why Staal’s first goal was waved off when Whitney was clearly pushed into Niittymaki, I will gladly listen. Knuble’s first goal should not have counted by this standard as he was right on top of Fleury and didn’t allow him room to make the save. And then somebody (Carter, I think, gets hit by Petrovicky and absolutely runs Fleury, but no call. The fact is he went recklessly to the net and would have nailed Fleury even if Petro didn’t hit him.

Guinness wrote:Mad City Mike wrote:BUFFOONS IN STRIPES: F. Yet again. Someday they will call a good game, but it likely won’t be in my lifetime. If somebody can explain why Staal’s first goal was waved off when Whitney was clearly pushed into Niittymaki, I will gladly listen. Knuble’s first goal should not have counted by this standard as he was right on top of Fleury and didn’t allow him room to make the save. And then somebody (Carter, I think, gets hit by Petrovicky and absolutely runs Fleury, but no call. The fact is he went recklessly to the net and would have nailed Fleury even if Petro didn’t hit him.
Can someone answer this question: They waved off the first Staal goal because Nittymaki was interfered with, but they didn't call interference. Does that mean it wasn't a penalty? If so, why wasn't it a goal?

DelPen wrote:Malkin had a great effort last night. His duck on Hatcher and then hatcher running himself into the post by the bench was hilarious. Malone may be doing well on the PK but I'll gladly go with Staal, Talbot, Army and Moore as my 4 guys. Malone is becoming a drag on the 1st line. Either trade him striaght up for a scoring winger for Crosby, doesn't matter which side because Rex can play LW or RW, or add a better defensemen and promote EC. Either way, I think malone is gone come deadline time.
As far as Forsberg goes, the Fleyrs are not in playoff contention and Forsberg is a UFA this summer so he'll go to the highest bidder and that will be a team in the East. Some teams may give up more just to make sure another team doesn't get him. Say you are the Isles and you see the Leafs are putting toegther a package, you better beat that or your season is most likely done. The teams have the the prospects and dire need to get Forsberg are probably the Isles, Rags and Leafs.
If I had to bet money it would be the Leafs. They have a lot of young defensemen in their system and the Flyers biggest need is some defensemen down the road.


Spikey wrote:IIRC, there are two levels of goaltender interference. One with a penalty, one without. Both result in no-goal.

Guinness wrote:Mad City Mike wrote:BUFFOONS IN STRIPES: F. Yet again. Someday they will call a good game, but it likely won’t be in my lifetime. If somebody can explain why Staal’s first goal was waved off when Whitney was clearly pushed into Niittymaki, I will gladly listen. Knuble’s first goal should not have counted by this standard as he was right on top of Fleury and didn’t allow him room to make the save. And then somebody (Carter, I think, gets hit by Petrovicky and absolutely runs Fleury, but no call. The fact is he went recklessly to the net and would have nailed Fleury even if Petro didn’t hit him.
Can someone answer this question: They waved off the first Staal goal because Nittymaki was interfered with, but they didn't call interference. Does that mean it wasn't a penalty? If so, why wasn't it a goal?


Pitts wrote:MarioLemieux1992 wrote:It seems he has been in a slump since that habs game now, good to see we can win without him, but it would be better to win with himMad City Mike wrote:SIDNEY CROSBY: D. Would have been an F except for the shootout winner. Terrible game by him. He was only credited with three giveaways, but there were many more where he made bad passes. Just not his night.
I think he's tired. And, if he's this tired right now, it doesn't look good for that over-loaded schedule in March. If need be, they may need to give him a night or two off soon.
arizonahotrock wrote:P.S. Here's another grade for you...
Steigy: A+++++++ If only for bringing back the hilariously awesome Staal nickname "The Pterodac-tile". Thank you, thank you, thank you!

Spikey wrote:arizonahotrock wrote:P.S. Here's another grade for you...
Steigy: A+++++++ If only for bringing back the hilariously awesome Staal nickname "The Pterodac-tile". Thank you, thank you, thank you!
I squawked out loud when he said that. I thought I was the only one.
arizonahotrock wrote:Spikey wrote:arizonahotrock wrote:P.S. Here's another grade for you...
Steigy: A+++++++ If only for bringing back the hilariously awesome Staal nickname "The Pterodac-tile". Thank you, thank you, thank you!
I squawked out loud when he said that. I thought I was the only one.
Absolutely not. It makes me laugh so hard every time. It's just so ridiculous to begin with...then you factor in the mispronunciation. Amazing.
Paulie_WalnutzII wrote:Pitts wrote:MarioLemieux1992 wrote:It seems he has been in a slump since that habs game now, good to see we can win without him, but it would be better to win with himMad City Mike wrote:SIDNEY CROSBY: D. Would have been an F except for the shootout winner. Terrible game by him. He was only credited with three giveaways, but there were many more where he made bad passes. Just not his night.
I think he's tired. And, if he's this tired right now, it doesn't look good for that over-loaded schedule in March. If need be, they may need to give him a night or two off soon.
A night or two off meaning, a game or two, or a couple of practices? I'm hoping you don't mean a game or two. After Satruday's game in Toronto, they don't play again until Wednesday. So, I think that will be plenty of time for him to get some rest. There is absolutely no way this team can afford to give Crosby a game off.
Rohit wrote:any idea if there is a youtube video of malkin's duck under hatcher?

Users browsing this forum: Desiato, DudeMan2766, Fire0nice228, Inkio, MarioLives, nhl94, PAPLine, Patton, pcm, Pitts, Sms75, tfrizz, The Colonel and 58 guests