[PGT] Flames lose to Senators, 4-3

[Andrew]

Why is Joel Hanley on the team?

[Erick Estrada]

Originally Posted by calumniate

Had a bad feeling they'd lose after the failed challenge. Why would you do that while up 1 0 early? Dumb dumb call by the coaches

He probably knew going into the game that Ottawa has been a difficult opponent for the Flames and really wanted the opportunity to get out to a quick 2 goal lead. In hindsight it was a bad move as there was clear contact regardless of the debate of if he was pushed in or not and the league has shown to stick with the call on the ice in most close instances. If the tables were turned and that was Wolf getting interfered with and no goal called on the ice I would be pretty upset if they overturned that call based on the replay evidence. Better to learn the lesson in a game of less consequence against an eastern conference team than a game of high importance.

[TheIronMaiden]

Originally Posted by Andrew

Why is Joel Hanley on the team?

Because when the injuries and trades happen we need players.

[Andrew]

Our ahl d has some prospects not sure if you follow. Just journeyman 30 year is don't see value

[TheIronMaiden]

Originally Posted by Andrew

Our ahl d has some prospects not sure if you follow. Just journeyman 30 year is don't see value

I am a huge fan of Solovyov. He will be an NHLer one day I think. Hanley has played 4 games so far. I don't want any AHL guys doing that.

[Andrew]

Originally Posted by TheIronMaiden

I am a huge fan of Solovyov. He will be an NHLer one day I think. Hanley has played 4 games so far. I don't want any AHL guys doing that.

I agree not to bench them just do we need 8 d? Kind of moot point if he is going to sit there. Kuznetzov is having a breakout d year too it seems plus 13. Porter could step it up. Just recall when we need.

[Robbob]

Originally Posted by Andrew

I agree not to bench them just do we need 8 d? Kind of moot point if he is going to sit there. Kuznetzov is having a breakout d year too it seems plus 13. Porter could step it up. Just recall when we need.

Then you risk losing when sending them down. The whole point of a 8th vet Dman is he isn't taking ice time away from anyone.

[Andrew]

Originally Posted by Robbob

Then you risk losing when sending them down. The whole point of a 8th vet Dman is he isn't taking ice time away from anyone.

Kuznetzov poirier waivers exempt. Solovoyov 30 day on roster before waivers. Yes do I agree though

[dirk diggler]

i knew the reffing was going to be horrible when Kirkland touched the goalie and the useless ref was so emphatic about it and then Wolf gets contacted much harder and the ref stands their pointing to the goal. open your eyes

[FBI]

Coronato and Sharangovich looked GREAT out there

[Andrew]

Just looked this up 1 so win with hanley in lineup 3 losses. It's on hanley lol
Last year equally bad. Probably just a coincidence but some truth to it

https://www.espn.com/nhl/player/news...12/joel-hanley

3 wins 11 losses with hanley in lineup

[dino7c]

Originally Posted by Scroopy Noopers

Jensen actually cleared the rebound right onto Sharangovichs stick.

Oilers get those assists all the time

[dino7c]

Originally Posted by calumniate

Had a bad feeling they'd lose after the failed challenge. Why would you do that while up 1 0 early? Dumb dumb call by the coaches

because he was pushed into the goalie? overhead view seemed pretty obvious. 2-0 lead early

[calumniate]

Originally Posted by dino7c

because he was pushed into the goalie? overhead view seemed pretty obvious. 2-0 lead early

Borderline.. but you know we're talking about the flames right? Coleman kicked a puck in as well the other year.. lol

[Bingo]

I'm not one to blame refs ... games like that happen.

The Weegar penalty was interesting for me though.

He pushed a puck carrier in the pants and the player went down.

1. No cross check as he didn't have a stick
2. No tripping because it was into the side of the player and not his feet or legs
3. Shouldn't be interference as the player had the puck

Shouldn't that have been a body check and no penalty?

[dino7c]

Originally Posted by Bingo

I'm not one to blame refs ... games like that happen.

The Weegar penalty was interesting for me though.

He pushed a puck carrier in the pants and the player went down.

1. No cross check as he didn't have a stick
2. No tripping because it was into the side of the player and not his feet or legs
3. Shouldn't be interference as the player had the puck

Shouldn't that have been a body check and no penalty?

Also the breakaway was about to be cut off, he was tired and took a superman dive

[Shazam]

Originally Posted by TrentCrimmIndependent

Pop on your tinfoil hat but I still remember an educational video on the dark web from some interwebs whizz where it was mentioned that NHL refs were seen for sale on there.

Of course I chuckled, but it was oddly specific for a video that had nothing to do with hockey, let alone the NHL.

On nights like tonight, part of me can't help but believe.

NGL the officiating was... odd.

[VANFLAMESFAN]

Originally Posted by Bingo

I'm not one to blame refs ... games like that happen.

The Weegar penalty was interesting for me though.

He pushed a puck carrier in the pants and the player went down.

1. No cross check as he didn't have a stick
2. No tripping because it was into the side of the player and not his feet or legs
3. Shouldn't be interference as the player had the puck

Shouldn't that have been a body check and no penalty?

I'm not calling Giroux a puck carrier there. He pushed the puck ahead 4-5 feet and was skating onto it when Weegar made a play on the body.

It's close, but I think it's the right call. The debate on the dive is completely different .

[Sylvanfan]

Kris King is on my hate list.

As a defenseman you should not be rewarded for letting an opponent get prime ice and pushing him into your own goaltender. I have a real problem with the league essentially saying the defenceman can push guys into their own goaltender when they give up that prime ice and nullify the consequences for doing that.

[TrentCrimmIndependent]

The push wasn't very pronounced and there wasn't a lot of effort by Kirkland to stop himself from bumping the goalie.

I can see why the call on the ice stood.

BUT

how they #### do they turn around and rule a goal for the sens on much more obvious interference minutes later?

They were laser focused on the sens' behalf all night but not for the Flames,. Was pretty glaring, and again just look at the penalty totals. The sloppiness and chippy play was going both ways, but the sens wind up with 9 calls to 2. That's highly irregular.

Sus af.