[OOT] December 17 with ten games!

[timbit]

2-1 Arizona

[Yoho]

https://twitter.com/user/status/1207160260248498176

[MrMike]

Originally Posted by DeluxeMoustache

Certainly they should blow down the ones where they stick the goalie in the mask

Technically one could argue that it’s just a shot follow through, which is allowed.

[Harry Lime]

Originally Posted by MrMike

Technically one could argue that it’s just a shot follow through, which is allowed.

Whacking someone in the face with a followthrough isn't allowed, I think. Any contact is called. Plus, with this play, the puck only leaves the stick once there is a change in direction. I don't know if there is a 'shot' in the traditional sense, so no followthrough?

[Enoch Root]

The reffing looks just as bad in SJ tonight. Three blatant infractions by the Yotes in a matter of 5 seconds, but nothing doing.

[Enoch Root]

Then, after ignoring the high stick and cross check, they call ARI for a face-off violation (maybe incorrectly).

[AC]

Hall sets up the Coyotes go-ahead goal late in the 3rd.

[atb]

Originally Posted by AC

Hall sets up the Coyotes go-ahead goal late in the 3rd.

Yeah pretty key play to give them the lead.

[Scroopy Noopers]

Originally Posted by Harry Lime

Whacking someone in the face with a followthrough isn't allowed, I think. Any contact is called. Plus, with this play, the puck only leaves the stick once there is a change in direction. I don't know if there is a 'shot' in the traditional sense, so no followthrough?

Follow through of a shot high sticking a player is allowed. (Also on a faceoff where a centreman is bent over). Those are the only two scenarios where high sticking isn’t called.

[dino7c]

Originally Posted by atb

Yeah pretty key play to give them the lead.

Pretty fortunate goal if we are being honest...shot was going 3 feet wide

[Enoch Root]

Fortunate goal, but great play by Hall

[dino7c]

Yotes announcers are ridiculous

[AC]

That was a hilariously bad Sharks PP on the 6-on-3.

[dino7c]

Yotes announcers thought they should put too many men on the ice in the final seconds because "you can only go two men down anyway, make them blow it down"

morons

[Jordan!]

Refs were doing everything possible to give the sharks that one

[atb]

Originally Posted by dino7c

Pretty fortunate goal if we are being honest...shot was going 3 feet wide

Yeah fortunate goal for sure, but pretty decent play by Hall to at least setup OEL

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by dino7c

Yotes announcers thought they should put too many men on the ice in the final seconds because "you can only go two men down anyway, make them blow it down"

morons

That was once an effective strategy, because he was right - you can't go less than 3 men.

However, with OT, they would be 2 men short indefinitely. The strategy doesn't make sense anymore.

Having said that, I was involved in a game where the coach kept throwing more guys out there and we kept getting more penalties. It worked though, we killed off the last minute for the win - with about 6 guys in the box. One of the funniest things I ever experienced in hockey.

[AC]

Originally Posted by dino7c

Yotes announcers thought they should put too many men on the ice in the final seconds because "you can only go two men down anyway, make them blow it down"

morons

Tyson Nash.

Especially dumb suggestion because if you intentionally put too many players on the ice to get a whistle it results in a penalty shot.

At least in a 5-on-3 situation. It's one of the "Roger Neilson rules".

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by Jordan!

Refs were doing everything possible to give the sharks that one

Dude, the Yotes got away with murder all night.

[Enoch Root]

I know it's heresy, but I like those Canuck 3rd jerseys