[GT] Team Canada vs. Team USA - Canadian Tire Centre - 5:00 MST

[calgaryblood]

Originally Posted by GirlySports

I've never understood why hockey continues to calculate winning goals incorrectly for a thousand years. The 1-0 goal (Tavares) is the winning goal.

Ha? This makes absolutely zero sense.

[GirlySports]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

well, my way is already being tracked. So you track your way and then we can discuss.

heh ok. it'll be a nice joke during GTs.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by GirlySports

heh ok. it'll be a nice joke during GTs.

I look forward to it!

And it will be interesting, I think (well, for you and I anyway).

How about we vote each game which player was more deserving, and see who wins the season.

[GirlySports]

Originally Posted by GreenLantern2814

No. A game winning goal is the goal that decides the outcome.

Originally Posted by calgaryblood

Ha? This makes absolutely zero sense.

The outcome was decided long ago. Canada scored to make it 1-0 and has been in a winning position ever since. So that's the winning goal.

Currently, if the US gets a garbage goal with 0:01 left it changes the game winning goal which is weird. And if Canada leads 6-2 and the US gets 2 garbage goals, Crawford gets the win which is weirder!

[JurassicTunga12]

Always nice to beat the US.

[calgaryblood]

Originally Posted by GirlySports

The outcome was decided long ago. Canada scored to make it 1-0 and has been in a winning position ever since. So that's the winning goal.

Currently, if the US gets a garbage goal with 0:01 left it changes the game winning goal which is weird. And if Canada leads 6-2 and the US gets 2 garbage goals, Crawford gets the win which is weirder!

Still doesn't make sense. The winning goal can't be decided when the Americans still could have tied the game and taken the lead. If Canada then comes back and wins then who gets the winner?



Correct me if I'm wrong but wasn't Crawford on the bench for the third goal? He wouldn't get the win if so.

Edit: misread the Crawford part.

[Lanny'sDaMan]

Hahahahah and for like the fifth time this game alone, Oshi loses his brain bucket

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

So after two games, here are what would be my lines.

Duchene - Crosby - Giroux
Tavares - Toews - Stamkos
Couture - Thornton - Bergeron (takes draws)
Marchand - Getzlaf - Perry
Seguin

Vlasic - Burns
Muzzin - Doughty
Bouwmeester - Weber
Pietrangelo

Holtby
Price
Crawford


... Seguin subs for Giroux if you need to switch things up, and Giroux can shift back to center the fourth line. A Marchand / Giroux / Perry line sounds like a nuclear holocaust of rustled jimmies.

[GirlySports]

Originally Posted by calgaryblood

Still doesn't make sense. The winning goal can't be decided when the Americans still could have tied the game and taken the lead. If Canada then comes back and wins then who gets the winner?



Correct me if I'm wrong but wasn't Crawford on the bench for the third goal? He wouldn't get the win if so.

Edit: misread the Crawford part.

Whenever the game is tied then the next goal is the game winner (until it's tied again)

[Coach]

Originally Posted by GirlySports

Whenever the game is tied then the next goal is the game winner (until it's tied again)

And then the NEXT goal is the winner.

[VilleN]

Originally Posted by GirlySports

Whenever the game is tied then the next goal is the game winner (until it's tied again)

I can't believe this is even an argument. The game winning goal is the goal that won the game. If the Tavares goal was the only goal scored Canada would have lost, so obviously it couldn't be considered the game winner. Canada did not need to score another goal after the Bouwmeester goal in order to win that game, therefore it is the game winner. To simplify, the game winner is the last lead taking goal.

Edit: It's late, should've read: the game winner is the last goal needed to win the game (outscore the opponent).

[Cube Inmate]

Originally Posted by GirlySports

Whenever the game is tied then the next goal is the game winner (until it's tied again)

I hate you for bringing this up because it makes so much sense. Now I'll never be able to forget it and I'll start arguing an unwinnable position. GWG should reflect the "clutch" player who breaks the tie.

[calgaryblood]

Originally Posted by GirlySports

Whenever the game is tied then the next goal is the game winner (until it's tied again)

So if the Flames are winning 2-1 late in the third on a Monahan goal and then Gaudreau scores to make it 3-1 with a few minutes to go. The other team pulls the goalie and scores one to make it a 3-2 final, you think Monahan deserves the winner? Gaudreau is the one that would have scored the clutch goal in the 60 minute hockey game. I know in your head it makes sense but it really doesn't. Hockey is 60 minutes in regulation and the winner should always go to the player who scored the goal that made his team win the game whether it's the 7th goal in a 7-6 game or the 3rd goal in a 7-2 win. The other team scored 2 goals so you needed 3 goals.

In your head the 1-0 goal should be the winner if the one team got off to a 7-0 lead and the other team scored 2 late goals?

[Mike F]

Can the mods please start a thread combining discussions on the Game Winning Goal, .500 Winning Percentage, and RGI so that I can avoid them all at once?

[djsFlames]

I actually don't care for either of these entitled vet teams. I want the kids to win.

[dash_pinched]

Great pic from last night:

[GirlySports]

Originally Posted by calgaryblood

So if the Flames are winning 2-1 late in the third on a Monahan goal and then Gaudreau scores to make it 3-1 with a few minutes to go. The other team pulls the goalie and scores one to make it a 3-2 final, you think Monahan deserves the winner? Gaudreau is the one that would have scored the clutch goal in the 60 minute hockey game. I know in your head it makes sense but it really doesn't. Hockey is 60 minutes in regulation and the winner should always go to the player who scored the goal that made his team win the game whether it's the 7th goal in a 7-6 game or the 3rd goal in a 7-2 win. The other team scored 2 goals so you needed 3 goals.

In your head the 1-0 goal should be the winner if the one team got off to a 7-0 lead and the other team scored 2 late goals?

yes my head works like that heh
Gaudreau scored what at the time was an insurance goal, Monahan still scored the clutchier goal cause it broke the tie.

Break the tie goal = GWG ≠ JBo

[MrMastodonFarm]

GirlySports has ideas on sport that the world isn't ready for

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by GirlySports

yes my head works like that heh
Gaudreau scored what at the time was an insurance goal, Monahan still scored the clutchier goal cause it broke the tie.

Break the tie goal = GWG ≠ JBo

I find myself repulsed by how confused that makes me... but in awe of how much sense that might make.

[schooner]

Originally Posted by MrMastodonFarm

GirlySports has ideas on sport that the world isn't ready for

Same idea as baseball. The winning pitcher is the pitcher of record the last time the lead changed. Just replace winning pitcher with winning goal.