I think you're just looking for an argument, and I'm not biting.
I'm not looking for an argument. Trying to engage in a debate, very obviously, but your opinion doesn't make me mad, but I think it's wrong.
The team lost.........people love to yell about "lack of heart". Sometimes that's true, but more often than not it's a catch phrase fans throw around to allow them to be mad at the players they feel let them down. I think lack of heart is very rarely the root cause of issues, especially in the NHL, the give a #### meter for most players when it comes to the Stanley Cup Playoffs is pretty high (versus maybe what you see in the NBA playoffs).
I think the Flames played like absolute ####. But I think they played like #### for two reasons:
1. As mentioned before, they choked under the pressure and played below their ability. We saw them loose foot speed versus the regular season, we saw them refuse to close the gaps in the neutral zone and fail to manage gaps, and we saw them turn over the pucks in their own zone unforced by dumping the puck out versus try their break outs. None of these say anything about lack of heart to me, to me they are the hallmark of nervous play, or choking.
2. I think there is some truth to the fact the physical make up of this team isn't right for playoff hockey, when the "rules" change and less gets called. But again, that's not a heart issue.
You want to say it's heart, but to me that's just an easy thing for a fan to say when they are angry because it's the most hurtful thing you can say about a player or team.
We'll see how much heart the sharks have moving forward
Neither team was anything special down the stretch...its possible they played equally poor in this series. They both certainly did their best to out choke the other
Things need to be set right, the Sharks don't deserve to be there. The Avs need to do the NHL that favour and then promptly be swept in the conference final.
The officials didn't make a 'bad call'. They called something they didn't see and didn't happen. That isn't a 'bad call'.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Resolute 14
That is pretty much the definition of a bad call.
I agree... it was clear that the ref's didn't see it.... if you DON'T SEE IT, you can't call it. They listened to the fans and Sharks and made that call based on pure emotion and what they did see after the fact... an injured player and blood on the ice. It was the WRONG CALL and these ref's should NOT get another game in the playoffs as punishment, I'd even go further and suggest that they should be suspended as punishment - not because of the WRONG judgement and call, but because they are refs and they DIDN'T SEE IT but they made a judgement call like they did and that's not what they're paid to do.
Forget the rule book... the number one rule for a referee is that you need to actually see the infracting (whether live or via video replay) to make any sort of judgement on it... and they never did that. Just imagine... you're a police officer, you walk into a situation where someone is lying on the ground bloody (dead) and someone else is covered in blood be their side... that person covered in blood must have killed that person - RIGHT- or maybe they just tried to help an injured person trying to save their life - but simply looking at the outcome doesn't tell you any of the story. Why not give Stastny a penalty - he was the last person to touch (push/shove) Pavelski... but no... because the Sharks told the ref what happened, what a great way to make a call. This play happens all the time... it was a stick battle after a face-off, they both had their sticks in a small cross checking position (Pavelski too - although he loses his balance and grip on his stick before it's really there to shove Eakins - but he was going to)... by small, I mean their hands were relatively close to each other, so more of a shove then a true cross check - and this happens on almost every face-off where the puck lies there for a moment. It wasn't even a penalty, but if it was, it was very minor. Stastny was more responsible for the injury than Eakin's.... Pavelski lost his balance after the shove from Eakins and fighting to get it back when he ran into to Stastny and couldn't recover from the double hit.
Bottomline: This was an atrocious call made by someone who simply didn't see it, and that's why it was WRONG.
Last edited by JackIsBack; 04-25-2019 at 07:35 AM.
Even MacLean walked back his comments from last night on the call in the 2nd intermission and shrugged his shoulders and said 'call it for what it was: a mistake'
The Following User Says Thank You to oldschoolcalgary For This Useful Post:
Well, except for the part where he refers to Furlatt as one of the best in the NHL. If that's the case, the league is in trouble.
Yes, and he cites the fact they were working game seven as evidence they are good. It was game seven of the first round, in a series they were tied to. That can be evidence only that they were seen by the NHL as middle of the pack refs (at worst).
He's right about Gallant not calling a time out, he's right about there being a technical argument in defence of the call, he's right that Eakin's goal was suspect (to say the least). He's wrong that the call has nothing to do with the outcome though. If a better call is made, say a 2 minute penalty, the outcome is different.
The Following User Says Thank You to GioforPM For This Useful Post:
citing the NHL expansion rules as what allowed the Knights to get into the playoffs in the first place and so vegas fans shouldn't criticize the NHL is a strawman argument, and a bad one at that.
it was a cross check...his assertion that it was worthy of a major, on its face, is ridiculous.
it wasn't a high cross check and no heavier than what you see in front of the net during virtually any PP in the NHL... the difference is that Pavelski lost his balance and was exacerbated by Statsny fighting through Pavelski to get to Burns at the point.
it was an accidental play... calling a major on that was an error.
Bringing it other arguments, like the Knights should not have let them score 4 goals (of course) or that they should have won leading 3-1 in the series are spurious.
the debate is the call costing them that game and that is was a bad call. Both of which are pretty clear to most fans outside of San Jose
The Following User Says Thank You to oldschoolcalgary For This Useful Post:
Location: Wondering when # became hashtag and not a number sign.
Exp:
Quote:
Originally Posted by oldschoolcalgary
citing the NHL expansion rules as what allowed the Knights to get into the playoffs in the first place and so vegas fans shouldn't criticize the NHL is a strawman argument, and a bad one at that.
it was a cross check...his assertion that it was worthy of a major, on its face, is ridiculous.
it wasn't a high cross check and no heavier than what you see in front of the net during virtually any PP in the NHL... the difference is that Pavelski lost his balance and was exacerbated by Statsny fighting through Pavelski to get to Burns at the point.
it was an accidental play... calling a major on that was an error.
Bringing it other arguments, like the Knights should not have let them score 4 goals (of course) or that they should have won leading 3-1 in the series are spurious.
the debate is the call costing them that game and that is was a bad call. Both of which are pretty clear to most fans outside of San Jose
Exactly. And if THAT was a major, then every single cross check ever thrown is a major.
That's how absurd that call was.
__________________
The Following User Says Thank You to transplant99 For This Useful Post:
People wanted accountability and there it is. An apology and the removal of those officials for the remainder of the playoffs. Thats probably as good as its going to get.
People wanted accountability and there it is. An apology and the removal of those officials for the remainder of the playoffs. Thats probably as good as its going to get.
They really should remove Furlatt permanently. He's the worst. No penalty called here either, many more examples of his bungling on youtube.
Are refs able to go upstairs to review plays of their own accord for situations where they may have missed what happened but the on ice result is a player injury?
Are refs able to go upstairs to review plays of their own accord for situations where they may have missed what happened but the on ice result is a player injury?
Nope. Penalties are not reviewable.
The Following User Says Thank You to Resolute 14 For This Useful Post:
4 at 
5 in overtime
must show all Flames games nationally when they play on Saturdays, Mondays, and Wednesdays !!!
