I'm all for rolling 4 lines at home when you are in the position to determine the match ups. The only issue is when your 4th line is constantly up against 1st or 2nd lines in away games. It happens way too often this year and I think is the major reason we are getting spanked away from the dome.
Winning and rolling 4 lines had a cause and effect opposite how some see it in my opinion. Can't play your 4th line when you need a goal or two
With the depth of our forward group, it's about time we can start rolling four lines. Love that Granlund appears to have taken a step forward. Need that to continue with guys like Colborne and Ferland.
Our blue line depth is starting to show as well -- Russell is out but we can still deploy a reliable top 6, with reinforcements ready in Stockton.
Even goaltending is no longer a huge liability; for all the Ramo haters we only have one back-to-back between now and the last week of January, so if Ramo keeps winning he might not ever come out.
Too bad our PK still sucks. Like really sucks. Adding Bouma will help, but the whole system isn't working.
Well Ferland needs to play at a consistent level and bring "it" more often than if he wants it, he'd be an anchor on that line at the moment.
Jones has been playing well pretty much all season now, plays a simple up and down game with a good first shot, he compliments Monahan and Gaudreau well. Ferland needs to up his game if he wants a spot like that.
I think Ferland has played very well. He hasn't been beast mode Ferland but I don't think we or even the coaches should expect him to be in the regular season.
I think the coaches expect him to make the smart choice and be good defensively and I think he's been very good in that regard. I've been watching him a lot lately and he has been very responsible defensively. He has been the guy who falls back to cover the defenseman when they pinch. Hrudey complimented Ferland on a smart decision to dump the puck in instead of making a high risk play.
I know everyone wants to see beast mode Ferland, but there really is a time and place for it. The fact is that beast mode Ferland can really only be deployed in the playoffs, because during the regular season, he will get penalized for most everything he does. I remember earlier this year, he layed a clean hit on Ekman-Larrson and he got a charging penalty for it and he didn't even take any strides. It was as clean a hit as you could throw and he got penalized for it.
His value to this team in the regular season is to be a bull on the puck along the boards, create space for his linemates, and protect his linemates.
__________________
Calgary Flames, PLEASE GO TO THE NET! AND SHOOT THE PUCK! GENERATING OFFENSE IS NOT DIFFICULT! SKATE HARD, SHOOT HARD, CRASH THE NET HARD!
The Following User Says Thank You to 868904 For This Useful Post:
Favorite part at the game last night was before the ref announced the too many men penalty and he had turned his mike on too early and yelled "I know it's too many men" to the other ref. He sounded like a two year old. It was great.
__________________
The Quest stands upon the edge of a knife. Stray but a little, and it will fail, to the ruin of all. Yet hope remains while the Company is true. Go Flames Go!
Anyone else bummed that Johnnys set up didn't count?
That was amazing.
Yeah it was a pretty amazing play. But in the end, the right call was made so I can't really complain too much.
And as for the slashes against Johnny, those need to stop and someone needs to start punching faces. It's only a matter of time before he's out with a wrist injury and those take forever to heal. Hopefully Burke is on the phone yapping at whomever will listen at NHL head office, because quite a few were missed last night.
I have to repeat what I've been saying for months: Allowing a Coach's Challenge on offsides is one of the most idiotic decisions the NHL has ever made.
Offsides are such a minor part of the game. They happen 65 feet away from the goal and they have no direct impact on the goal being scored. There are so many other plays where a goal is scored directly because a defending player was interfered with, tripped, or slashed prior to a goal and the infraction doesn't get called. Those plays have an absolute direct impact on the scoring play, yet they're not reviewable.
A missed close offside doesn't really give the scoring team any significant advantage. Once the puck enters the zone and isn't blown dead, everyone on the ice is on a level playing field, so let them play the game.
__________________
Turn up the good, turn down the suck!
The Following 8 Users Say Thank You to getbak For This Useful Post:
I have to repeat what I've been saying for months: Allowing a Coach's Challenge on offsides is one of the most idiotic decisions the NHL has ever made.
Offsides are such a minor part of the game. They happen 65 feet away from the goal and they have no direct impact on the goal being scored. There are so many other plays where a goal is scored directly because a defending player was interfered with, tripped, or slashed prior to a goal and the infraction doesn't get called. Those plays have an absolute direct impact on the scoring play, yet they're not reviewable.
A missed close offside doesn't really give the scoring team any significant advantage. Once the puck enters the zone and isn't blown dead, everyone on the ice is on a level playing field, so let them play the game.
And the most idiotic part about it is that entire rule change came from the one Duchene play. They made a rule based on the exception.
I have to repeat what I've been saying for months: Allowing a Coach's Challenge on offsides is one of the most idiotic decisions the NHL has ever made.
Offsides are such a minor part of the game. They happen 65 feet away from the goal and they have no direct impact on the goal being scored. There are so many other plays where a goal is scored directly because a defending player was interfered with, tripped, or slashed prior to a goal and the infraction doesn't get called. Those plays have an absolute direct impact on the scoring play, yet they're not reviewable.
A missed close offside doesn't really give the scoring team any significant advantage. Once the puck enters the zone and isn't blown dead, everyone on the ice is on a level playing field, so let them play the game.
It actually is significant, because if the refs caught the offside on the play then there would have been no play that resulted in a goal
I'm salty too since it was a beauty, but rules are rules. It was offside
I have more of a problem with hartley wasting everyone's time with these idiotic challenges over goaltender interference
Yeah it was a pretty amazing play. But in the end, the right call was made so I can't really complain too much.
And as for the slashes against Johnny, those need to stop and someone needs to start punching faces. It's only a matter of time before he's out with a wrist injury and those take forever to heal. Hopefully Burke is on the phone yapping at whomever will listen at NHL head office, because quite a few were missed last night.
At some point Ferland or Engelland are going to have to make an example out of someone.
Its getting ridiculous.
__________________
My name is Ozymandias, King of Kings;
It actually is significant, because if the refs caught the offside on the play then there would have been no play that resulted in a goal
I'm salty too since it was a beauty, but rules are rules. It was offside
I have more of a problem with hartley wasting everyone's time with these idiotic challenges over goaltender interference
On the other hand, there are many plays where it's blown dead and the replay shows it wasn't actually offside. You don't get to challenge that and get a do-over on the play.
There are many plays that should have been blown dead, aren't, and the team doesn't score, so it's not reviewed and no time is added to the clock.
Maybe there was a missed offside early in a period that allowed a team to have possession in the zone for an extra 30 seconds, but because a goal wasn't scored, that 30 seconds doesn't get added back to the clock, so then late in that same period the other team scores 2 seconds after time expired. If we allow teams to challenge a missed offside 30 seconds before a goal, why can't the team that scored late challenge a missed offside that happened 15 minutes earlier?
It's a fast-paced game. Sometimes, the linesmen miss offsides. Sometimes, the linesmen blow a play dead when they shouldn't have.
Goals should only be disallowed if there was a missed infraction that led directly to the goal being scored. The only thing a missed offside does is allow the play to continue. The players still have to put the puck in the net. There are a lot of things that have to happen from the time the puck enters the zone until it enters the net. None of those things are the result of a player lifting his skate a fraction of a second too early.
I've been complaining about this since it was announced. I will keep complaining about it until the standards by which an offside can be challenged are changed. If the Flames had benefitted by a challenged offside, I would be glad that they benefitted, but I would still think it's absolutely idiotic to allow it to be challenged in the first place.
__________________
Turn up the good, turn down the suck!
The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to getbak For This Useful Post:
A goal that is scored as a result of a play that should have been stopped is not legitimate
I am honestly trying to understand what you're getting at, but can't. Your opinion is wrong. This is a good change for the NHL. Letting potentially game deciding goals(that by the book should not have been scored) happen because "the game is fast" makes the NHL really bush league
The Following User Says Thank You to stone hands For This Useful Post:
Every missed call should have been a stoppage in play. Are we going to start challenging high sticks, icings and missed penalties too?
It ruins the flow of the game for a miniscule advantage. The linesmen are only missing offsides that are extremely close. The offending team has almost no advantage from having a skate a couple inches ahead of where it should've been.
Should we just stop calling everything all together then?
I don't see how spending 2 extra minutes getting the call right is a bad thing. As I said, bobs ridiculous habit of challenging goaltender interference is a lot more disruptive to the flow of the game
Does anyone know what would happen in the following scenario:
Team A enters the offensive zone offsides, but no call is made and play goes on. Team B takes away the puck and goes down the ice and scores before any stoppages occur.
Could Team A challenge the goal based on the fact that there should have been a stoppage when they entered the zone offsides?
Every missed call should have been a stoppage in play. Are we going to start challenging high sticks, icings and missed penalties too?
It ruins the flow of the game for a miniscule advantage. The linesmen are only missing offsides that are extremely close. The offending team has almost no advantage from having a skate a couple inches ahead of where it should've been.
Not always....
__________________
"The problem with quotes on the Internet is that it is hard to verify their authenticity" -Abraham Lincoln
