Quote:
Originally Posted by GhostCookie
It's a frustratingly omissive piece, as like has been mentioned, if you didn't know the score you would have thought the Stars completely outplayed the Flames.
Summed up, the article is basically "World baffled as Flames win game in spite of Dallas being the best defensively!"
Like it mentions how good Oettinger was while saying Markstrom wasn't very busy. Then how does that make Dallas better defensively?!
Flames limited to 26 shots and no chances off the rush, but skips by the fact that Dallas went the first half of the first period and the last half of the last period without a shot, and kept to just 16 total. How does THAT make Dallas better defensively?!
No mention of how the top line (which as mentioned clearly in the article Dallas shut down in tremendous fashion) managed to lock Oettinger in his net for the last minute of play, keeping Dallas from even getting the 6th man on the ice, let alone being set up.
Dallas maybe was a lucky bounce or a bad breakdown away from tying the game, but the Flames were the better team, period. And a few of those saves Oettinger made could easily have been goals and then it's a whole different game with Dallas down 2 or 3 to nothing. I just can't get over the bias in the sports media.
|
Just remember that the obvious and opaque media bias creates the circumstances for Sutter to leverage the underdog narrative, which only reinforces a higher work ethic every game and may actually be necessary for the Flames to win. Personally, I get uncomfortable when the media runs around singing the teams praises too much, because then I see Tkachuk making cutesy / risky passes instead of playing how he needs to play, like he did last night.