WC Playoffs Round 1: Colorado Avalanche vs Minnesota Wild (Wild win 4-3).

[edn88]

Originally Posted by $ven27

Am I missing something? How is that offside? His Stastnys leg is still over the blue line.

Stastney is considered in the zone - his back foot is off the ice - and the puck has not crossed the blue line. Had he had his foot down it would have been fine. And clearly linesman was not in position to make call. Coach's challenge would have been good here.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[TKB]

Originally Posted by edn88

Stastney is considered in the zone - his back foot is off the ice - and the puck has not crossed the blue line. Had he had his foot down it would have been fine. And clearly linesman was not in position to make call. Coach's challenge would have been good here.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

That is so close either way that it's not a surprise at all that it was missed, especially with the speed of the game.

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by $ven27

Am I missing something? How is that offside? His Stastnys leg is still over the blue line.

The blue line is considered to be part of the zone the puck is in. No part of Stastny's body is on the ice in the neutral zone, and the puck has not yet entered the attacking zone. That play is plainly offside. Unfortunately, the linesman in the picture is caught in a horrible spot to see that. No idea why he wasn't standing right on the line like he is supposed to. Presumably the linesman on the other side was still behind the play and likewise did not have a good angle. It definitely stands as a strong example of why expanded replay is required.

The non-call on the interference is completely unforgivable, however. There is no excuse or justification for failing to call such a blatant penalty when it directly costs a team a goal - and the win.

[puffnstuff]

Watching the NY Philly game, there was a holding call. Announcer says 'its guaranteed to get called everytime you take your hand off your stick and put it on your opponent to impede him'
He obviously didnt watch the game last night.

[dino7c]

Originally Posted by puffnstuff

Watching the NY Philly game, there was a holding call. Announcer says 'its guaranteed to get called everytime you take your hand off your stick and put it on your opponent to impede him'
He obviously didnt watch the game last night.

I think its even worse when the guy is about to put the puck in the open net

[PeteMoss]

The offside call being missed I can understand with the linesman trying to avoid getting hit, but that missed penalty... wow.

Also I blame the Wild GM for not finding a real goalie at the trade deadline.

[nmhen]

Originally Posted by PeteMoss

Also I blame the Wild GM for not finding a real goalie at the trade deadline.

I don't.

Kuemper was playing great, and the Wild has two other goalies on 1-way deals already (and both "hurt"). You need to give Kuemper some carrot, and why in the world would you give up assets with that many goalies already on the books?

Now, Kuemper started not playing great soon thereafter, and then went and sustained a concussion, in a practice, no less.

And if you wanted to argue that Fletcher took too much risk by going into the season with a still-injured Backstrom (to whom he gave a new contract last summer, to boot) and a MS-stricken Harding as his 1st and 2nd options in goal, I probably wouldn't put up too much of a fuss.

It's going to be a very interesting summer in Wild land, vis-a-vis goalies. I can't see Fletcher telling Kuemper he has to go to Iowa in October. Not when he's played this well overall. But Bax is on a 35 year old contract, that carries a $3.416M cap hit for the next TWO seasons beyond this one (that hurts). They cannot compliance buyout Bax as he was signed after the new CBA was in place.

Harding has one more year at $1.9M cap hit. I also can't see Fletcher telling Harding to take a hike - just for the optics and the humanity. But maybe Harding realizes that he simply cannot predict or control when he will be unavailable to the team. Which is heartbreaking, particularly after he just played the best he's ever played in his (relatively brief, NHL games-wise) career. The best thing for the team would be Harding retiring, but I'm sure not going to tell him that.

Bryz did great down the stretch, then while he wasn't great, was hardly the only reason the Wild went down 0-2 in this series. And he bought Kuemper enough time to get back to health and his A-game, evidently.

[nmhen]

I really hate whining about the refs, and they were not the whole reason the Wild lost that game, but that was pretty ugly. It wasn't totally one-sided (Landeskog minor in the third), but they became a large part of the story at the end of regulation that led to the tie, and that's not right.

The Wild said all the right things yesterday about not blaming the refs and they (the players) need to do more. And the bottom line is the Wild has blown two third period leads on the road in this series, regardless of how that has come to pass. You just can't do that.

[DuffMan]

that's a tough way to go out, for Minny fans.

[19Yzerman19]

Originally Posted by edn88

Stastney is considered in the zone - his back foot is off the ice - and the puck has not crossed the blue line. Had he had his foot down it would have been fine.

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

The blue line is considered to be part of the zone the puck is in. No part of Stastny's body is on the ice in the neutral zone, and the puck has not yet entered the attacking zone. That play is plainly offside.

I understand that this is how it's called, but looking at the rule I'm not so sure.

Originally Posted by NHL Rule 83

83.1 Off-side - Players of the attacking team must not precede the puck into the attacking zone.

The position of the player’s skates and not that of his stick shall be the determining factor in all instances in deciding an off-side. A player is off-side when both skates are completely over the leading edge of the blue line involved in the play.

A player is on-side when either of his skates are in contact with, or on his own side of the line, at the instant the puck completely crosses the leading edge of the blueline regardless of the position of his stick. However, a player actually controlling the puck who shall cross the line ahead of the puck shall not be considered “off-side,” provided he had possession and control of the puck prior to his skates crossing the blue line.

It should be noted that while the position of the player’s skates is what determines whether a player is “off-side,” nevertheless the question of an “off-side” never arises until the puck has completely crossed the leading edge of the blueline at which time the decision is to be made.

His skates aren't "in contact with" the line, because his back skate is off the ice. However, because his back leg is extended somewhat, it's arguably "on his own side of the line", in spite of the fact that it isn't touching the ice. There's no requirement that it BE touching the ice in the text.

Further, the requirement that "both skates be completely over the leading edge" clearly isn't met - his back skate is off the ice, sure, but I don't see how you can interpret it as being across the blue line.

Maybe we all just only thought we knew what offside was.

[M*A*S*H 4077]

Duchene is back

[M*A*S*H 4077]

1-0 Minny. That was quick

Lucky bounce and in

[M*A*S*H 4077]

Ridiculous interference by Minnesota right in front of the ref, no call

[FlamesAndBruins]

I'm happy that these threads don't devolve into pure "bitch about the refs here" like threads like on HF. That said, I hope the Avs win for entertainment value. Game 7 pls though

[dino7c]

Originally Posted by M*A*S*H 4077

Ridiculous interference by Minnesota right in front of the ref, no call

good, the refs owe them a few more

[M*A*S*H 4077]

Yikes. Varlamov should have had that one

[$ven27]

Weak 2-0 goal there

[RedCoffee]

Slashing.

Ok.

[dino7c]

Originally Posted by $ven27

Weak 2-0 goal there

worst lead in hockey

[M*A*S*H 4077]

Minnesota is getting all the bounces. Wow