GDT:REVENGE! Canada VS Switzerland 5:30PM MST; CTV, FAN960 - Page 40 - Calgarypuck Forums - The Unofficial Calgary Flames Fan Community

OILFAN #81 · 02-18-2010, 08:19 PM

First Gerber, now Hiller. Swiss goalies put on show vs Canada. Sucks we lost a point for not winning in regulation but to get a bye to the QF's would have been determined regardless on Sunday vs the US. We need to win that game on Sunday to get a bye.

bubbsy · 02-18-2010, 08:19 PM

Just got back from the pub. Naturally, extremely disappointed.

Why was iggy nowhere to be seen? Couldn't hear commentators at the pub, was he on the bench or any mention of injury?!?

What's with thornton's look for the cute/fancy tic-tac-toe pass in the slot EVERY FRIGGIN time rather than shooting. I HATE thornton. there's a reason he SUCKS in playoff games.

other than that, meh, sloppy game. turn and face for the next one, they will be bashed till sunday.

sa226 · 02-18-2010, 08:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RandomDad

Except the Stanley Cup

I thought someone might point that out.

IT WAS IN!!!! we need Gelinas I guess

He came a hell of a lot closer than Bergeron, Nash, Toews, Richards

Oh ya and he also won an Olympic gold, how monay of the forwards can say that.

Surely with the brain trust up in the press box and on the bench they must realize it ?

MRCboicgy · 02-18-2010, 08:20 PM

I'll go back and say a little adversity never hurt. Remember how bad Canada was in 02? 1-1-1 after three games, barely beating the Germans. Gretz shoots his mouth off and takes a ton of heat and the team gels and then plays some great hockey (and gets lucky when Salo Belarus'ed it).

moon · 02-18-2010, 08:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chanimal40

+ Perry, Bergeron. Come on.

Perry would have had the game winning goal if not for a crazy save and was the only one on that line doing anything.

Bergeron won some key draws and played okay for a 13th forward.

Plenty of other poor roster decisions other than these two tonight.

Pastiche · 02-18-2010, 08:21 PM

Just a poor game all around. It started with the D not being able to handle the hard forecheck. That translated to a poor transition game. The Canadian forwards couldn't generate much off the rush, and then they just couldn't get it done when they had possession in the zone.

RandomDad · 02-18-2010, 08:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tussery

Your point? What has Nash done in the playoffs? He hasn't even been out of the first round, or in a SCF, or in a Olympic Gold Medal game and he kept getting ice time.

It was a joke. Don't get all bent out of shape.

zamler · 02-18-2010, 08:22 PM

All I know is, if Babcock continues to be ######ed and not roll all 4 lines consistently, I don't see us winning Gold.

Resolute 14 · 02-18-2010, 08:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OILFAN #81

First Gerber, now Hiller. Swiss goalies put on show vs Canada. Sucks we lost a point for not winning in regulation but to get a bye to the QF's would have been determined regardless on Sunday vs the US. We need to win that game on Sunday to get a bye.

The fourth team that gets a bye is very likely to end with six or seven points. If we won this game in regulation, and OTL against the US might have put us through anyway. Now, that game becomes a must win, because 1-1-0-1 won't do it.

nfotiu · 02-18-2010, 08:23 PM

The loss of the point was very signicant.

Here's the format, tie breakers,etc:

http://www.iihf.com/channels10/olymp...en/format.html

Essentially the 3 group winners and a wild card get the bye. The loss of point almost guarantees we won't get seed #1 or #2 even with a win against USA. It also all but eliminates us from backing into the wild card bye spot.

To clarify an earlier comment, the winner of the game is the first tie breaker for ties within a group. So all that matters is beating US in reg or OT, or SO. Any of those gets us a #3 seed. Lose that game and the loss of point tonight, we drop way down in the quarter final seeding, and probably have to play a decent team to just make the semis.,

flames_1987 · 02-18-2010, 08:23 PM

As I understand it it's not as simple as beating the US in Regulation to get the bye because it's simply not that easy according to how Cuthbert explained it. Am I wrong here?

chanimal40 · 02-18-2010, 08:23 PM

Canada is not playing their game, first period they should have come out hitting everything, and then establish a good forecheck.

Mayer · 02-18-2010, 08:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

Who do you think should play goal against the US? If Marty gets between the pipes and Canada loses are you going to second guess the coach?

I have no idea who he should play against the US. I'm not an elite coach though, and I'm glad i don't have to make that decision.

For the record, I think it will be Marty, and I wouldn't question the coaching if he lost that game.

stignasty · 02-18-2010, 08:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by zamler

All I know is, if Babcock continues to be ######ed and not roll all 4 lines consistently, I don't see us winning Gold.

Yeah, rather than develop some chemistry, mix up the lines some more.

braveheart57 · 02-18-2010, 08:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by VladtheImpaler

I find reading this thread quite amusing - this is what it must feel like for other teams' fans reading Flames game threads.

So much bias and emotional involvement. I don't think Canada was nearly as bad as you guys think. I think the Swiss played really well, and... crap happens.

Hard to say, because the U.S. team which has looked fairly average, beat them 3-1. I definitely thought the Swiss were much more physical, which I found really surprising. I think maybe Canada expected an easier time of it and got caught by surprise a little. I think they have to get nastier.

Looking forward to seeing how Russia does tonight, they looked pretty good in their 1st game.

ricosuave · 02-18-2010, 08:26 PM

The swiss almost "2004 Flame"d Canada...

sa226 · 02-18-2010, 08:27 PM

I think the more games they have to play the better. Obviously its dangerous, but the team needs to come together, and it needs to play desperate.

This game with the adversity, was probably good for them. It was a wakeup call.

I wouldn't be surprised if they beat the US quite convincingly.

Mathgod · 02-18-2010, 08:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sa226

I thought someone might point that out.

IT WAS IN!!!! we need Gelinas I guess

He came a hell of a lot closer than Bergeron, Nash, Toews, Richards

Oh ya and he also won an Olympic gold, how monay of the forwards can say that.

Surely with the brain trust up in the press box and on the bench they must realize it ?

It wasn't in, but I agree with the rest of the post.

Mayer · 02-18-2010, 08:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ark2

Iginla aside, I think he is mishandeling his bench. Bergeron should not be anywhere near the first line and guys like Morrow and Richards should get more than 1 shift in the third period. Canada is strong because of it's depth, but when your coach benches half your team in the final period, you lose that depth.

My only real complaint about Babcock was that he didn't keep lines somewhat together. I realize that's not always easy when you have an extra forward dressed every game, but I would like to see a little more consistency.

Resolute 14 · 02-18-2010, 08:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by braveheart57

Hard to say, because the U.S. team which has looked fairly average, beat them 3-1. I definitely thought the Swiss were much more physical, which I found really surprising. I think maybe Canada expected an easier time of it and got caught by surprise a little. I think they have to get nastier.

The Swiss are much better than people are giving them credit for.

But this team should not blow a 2-0 lead the way it did