[OOT] October 12 with six games.

[FireGilbert]

The Oilers forwards ice time was hilarious. They only dressed 11 forwards and 4 of them played over 20 minutes. That's more time each than their bottom 3 of Shore, Malone, and Holloway combined (19:56).

Can't see this being sustainable especially when short term injuries hit and they actually can only dress 8 forwards.

[Tsawwassen]

1 at 4

https://stats.cbc.ca/hockey/nhl/recap/145728
https://scores.nbcsports.com/nhl/rec...=29&final=true
https://www.espn.com/nhl/recap/_/gameId/401458595
https://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/nhl/games/2465646/
__________________________________________________


4 at 5 in overtime

https://stats.cbc.ca/hockey/nhl/recap/145733
https://scores.nbcsports.com/nhl/rec...=59&final=true
https://www.espn.com/nhl/recap/_/gameId/401458594
https://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/nhl/games/2465649/

[Erick Estrada]

Can't take a lot from early season games although it appears the officials are in mid-season form. I have no idea how not a single official didn't witness Kane's high stick at the side of the net as that no-call was likely the difference between a win and a loss for the Canucks. That shouldn't happen in an NHL game.

[Toonage]

Does it really matter if the Oilers don't have a full roster? They never play 12 guys a game anyway. Almost always 10 with McDavid & Draisaitl taking additional shifts away from the bottom 6 players.

[Erick Estrada]

Originally Posted by Toonage

Does it really matter if the Oilers don't have a full roster? They never play 12 guys a game anyway. Almost always 10 with McDavid & Draisaitl taking additional shifts away from the bottom 6 players.

Yeah they can get away with it at times but it's going to be problematic in games where they lose a forward or even two to injury during the game.

[Steve Bozek]

I still don’t understand why Kane’s high stick on Hughes didn’t make the Oilers’ first goal reviewable or eligible for a coach’s challenge. The infraction occurred at the start of the goal mouth scramble that resulted in the goal. Am I missing something about the rules for goals being reviewed, or use of a coach’s challenge?

[CaptainCrunch]

I don't know if you can review for a penalty like a high stick, it might be early, but I don't recall.

All that game was, was a battle of two pretty bad teams.

The Oilers were once again atrocious in 5v5 hockey, they lack dicipline, their blueline looks a not very gooda. And the forward group is really simply Piss and bitter beer face McDavid, there's nothing after that.

Holloway with his welcome to the NHL moment with a brutal brain dead middle of the ice give away.

Nurse continues his poor play since he signed his mega contract.

And the Oilers can't play a full roster.

Buckle up Oiler Fans its about to get bad in heeere

[tony-soprano]

Originally Posted by Locke

They keep getting horseshoes though.

This charade should have fallen by now and yet here we are.

Basically this, they somehow keep managing to goad teams into playing run and gun game.

[topfiverecords]

I recall a Flames game last year where an opponent went off bleeding and at the next whistle the refs went and looked at the video to find the high stick. It was bizarre and obvious what was going on there.

[Major Major]

Yup I thought they could now review a high stick if it's deemed to be a double minor. Seems like the refs got shook by loud noises.

[topfiverecords]

Originally Posted by Major Major

Yup I thought they could now review a high stick if it's deemed to be a double minor. Seems like the refs got shook by loud noises.

Can they review to look for a high stick they missed? I thought it was just to review a high stick penalty that was called when it’s not clear who‘s stick it was.

Edit: yep found the rule change from 2019

DOUBLE MINOR FOR HIGH-STICKING: Referees will have the ability to conduct an on-ice video review to confirm (or not) their original call on the ice, and, in particular, whether the stick causing the apparent injury was actually the stick of the Player being penalized. The Referee’s review of all High-Sticking/Double-Minor Penalties will be discretionary and not mandatory and will be conducted without consultation with the NHL Situation Room.

[Steve Bozek]

Originally Posted by topfiverecords

Can they review to look for a high stick they missed? I thought it was just to review a high stick penalty that was called when it’s not clear who‘s stick it was.

Edit: yep found the rule change from 2019

I can see from this that the refs didn’t have to review this even though an infraction rather obviously occurred. But since the penalty took a key defender out of the play, and contributed to the goal mouth scramble and goal, why couldn’t Boudreau challenge?

[1Nite]

My mouth breathing co-worker complaining to me how the reffing was so one sided for Vancouver favor. So delusional.

[EldrickOnIce]

Went from getting ready to toss the jersey to we gonna win the cup pretty quickly.
Typical response is typical

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Steve Bozek

I can see from this that the refs didn’t have to review this even though an infraction rather obviously occurred. But since the penalty took a key defender out of the play, and contributed to the goal mouth scramble and goal, why couldn’t Boudreau challenge?

Not a challengeable play. Offside, goalie interference, puck in with high stick, kick or glove - those you can challenge. Not random penalties.

That said, come on ref. The guy was on his knees bleeding. At least stop the play for injury.

[bdubbs]

Didn't watch the game but from the highlights, Quinn Hughes looks hilariously bad at defense.

[MrMike]

Originally Posted by topfiverecords

Can they review to look for a high stick they missed? I thought it was just to review a high stick penalty that was called when it’s not clear who‘s stick it was.

Edit: yep found the rule change from 2019

To me the wording sounds like if they call one it is reviewable, not to see if they missed a call. A call must be made for it to be reviewed. Isn’t it only Majors that can be called after being missed?

[Snowghost]

Originally Posted by bdubbs

Didn't watch the game but from the highlights, Quinn Hughes looks hilariously bad at defense.

Yes had some good moments, but his defense is soft quite often.

[Snowghost]

Originally Posted by 1Nite

My mouth breathing co-worker complaining to me how the reffing was so one sided for Vancouver favor. So delusional.

Definitely delusional. On every single penalty called against the No-goods, their player was questioning/beaking at the refs. As opposed to when Boeser took that unlucky penalty at the end of the game, he went quietly to the box.

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

And you'd think the refs would appreciate the team that takes its medicine when appropriate and punish the team that whines at every opportunity, but nope, just the opposite. Being the squeaky wheel works.