Originally Posted by lockman21 (Post 16331234)

Tough to lose to St. Louis like that, but that was a hell of a hockey game. My heart was pounding the entire time.

Originally Posted by hailtopitt (Post 16331453)

the Blues/Hawks game was great to watch if you ignore all of the dirty hits and terrible officiating

and that's not a tongue-in-cheek comment. it really was good, skillful hockey but with a ton of unnecessary side show crap

Panarin is a joy to watch

Originally Posted by Lcsulla (Post 16331487)

I thought the officiating was pretty fair, guys on both teams just took stupid penalties and deserved to be sent to the box. I do wish they'd give the refs some better monitors for replays - I didn't see an angle that showed definitively that Ladd's (waved off goal) was not legit. So be it though. Great game. Completely agree on Panarin, he is amazing to watch and oddly enough scored the only even strength goal of the game - he is way up in goals, assists and points and plus minus - no idea how he could loose the Calder.

Also, ESPN needs to update their article for accuracy, they said Toews point streak was ended last night but he was credited with the primary assist on the Panarin goal when Crawford was out for a sixth skater!

Originally Posted by hailtopitt (Post 16331543)

i don't know, that game misconduct was a terrible call IMO. and i'm ok with the Ladd goal staying disallowed because that was the call on the ice. you'll have that every once in a while

and i know the refs are just looking at small tablets, but isn't the call ultimately coming from Toronto? or is goalie interference/no goal/good goal called in house?

Originally Posted by Lcsulla (Post 16331582)

I was okay with that game misconduct - the fool had a straight lane to the puck but went for the cheapshot instead.

No doubt Ladd's goal was questionable but was it really interference or just grit in front of the net. Also, not sure whether the review is ultimately judged in Toronto or by the on ice refs with the iPod size screens!

Originally Posted by kev87lads (Post 16331579)

Go Jets Go!

Originally Posted by Lcsulla (Post 16331627)

When you leave your feet for a check it is almost always a 4 minute major. The ref did not have a good angle to see the hit so I can understand how he would have thought it was a hit to the head.

Originally Posted by TMoore4075 (Post 16331628)

fuck you.

Originally Posted by unccrombie (Post 16331684)

bottom line is this, it should be a reviewable play if you're tossing the guy out of the game.
Many leagues have adopted this policy.
I, for one, don't think he deserved a match penalty.
Erhoff clearly bailed out of the check by tossing himself backwards.

Originally Posted by Lcsulla (Post 16331627)

When you leave your feet for a check it is almost always a 4 minute major. The ref did not have a good angle to see the hit so I can understand how he would have thought it was a hit to the head.

Originally Posted by hailtopitt (Post 16331674)

from my relatively novice interpretation, leaving your feet and/or travelling an unnecessary distance for a check is basic charging

charging AND targeting the head/neck area is where you'd see the 5 minute major & game misconduct

Originally Posted by hailtopitt (Post 16331676)

maybe Matty can weigh in on the hit. here it is

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FUxN0893GZU

Originally Posted by fonzz41 (Post 16331807)

Leaving your feet for a shoulder-to-shoulder check is a charging minor. And even then, it's up to interpretation. Even with a clean body check, there is almost always some aspect of skates leaving the ice as momentum carries the hitter forward into the player. It's up to the ref to decide if it was just that, or if there was something more egregious. Now, usually leaving your feet MEANS that high contact is being made, hence sometimes more serious penalties.

A double minor is usually only imposed if a) two fouls were committed on the same play, or b) a visible injury occurred as a result of the play, i.e., high sticking a guy in the mouth, and he starts bleeding.



OK, here's what he didn't do:
- There were no excessive strides before the hit. He was gliding all the way.
- I felt like Ehrhoff was going for the puck in such a way that Reaves could reasonably expect him to have it, and therefore be eligible for the hit. By the time Ehrhoff pulled up, Reaves was already on trajectory to hit him.
- He did leave his feet, but I feel it was more a product of the hit itself (however, more on this below)

Despite all that though, there was one kicker: He targeted the head. It was a clear high hit that Reaves is responsible for. If he would have lowered his shoulder and taken Ehrhoff right in the chest (or bent over and given him some hip action, which is much more fun ;)), not only would his skates have stayed more on the ice, but it would have been a completely clean and legal check. Not even a minor penalty.

While I wouldn't have given him a match penalty, you know how I am with head shots and illegal hits: I want them gone, and the only way to really effect change is severity in penalization. With that in mind, even though there was no apparent injury or anything like that, I STILL would have given him a 5-minute major for illegal contact to the head and a game misconduct.

Originally Posted by hailtopitt (Post 16331825)

yea i'm with you on wanting head shots gone, but to me the principle point of contact was the chest on this hit

any head contact was ancillary and minimal from what i see

and again, the refs have to police this and make calls at full speed, so kudos to the refs. i can see why they would err on the side of caution here, i just felt like it was charging and only charging. i don't blame Reaves for being upset about being kicked out

Originally Posted by fonzz41 (Post 16331861)

On the clip you sent, you can totally see his shoulder totally hitting him in the mouth. You could say the shoulder slid up into his head, sure. But we could argue about that all day. For me, it goes beyond that. It's getting it through guys' heads that they don't hit UP and into a guy, like Reaves did. You skate INTO them, not UP into them. If Reaves had done that, it wouldn't even have been a penalty. Not charging, not roughing, not anything.

Originally Posted by fonzz41 (Post 16331864)

And also, I agree with you in not blaming him for being upset at being kicked out, because the league has established a precedent that if the guy's not down on the ice unconscious, it's OK.

Originally Posted by hailtopitt (Post 16331543)

and i know the refs are just looking at small tablets, but isn't the call ultimately coming from Toronto? or is goalie interference/no goal/good goal called in house?

Originally Posted by fonzz41 (Post 16331864)

And also, I agree with you in not blaming him for being upset at being kicked out, because the league has established a precedent that if the guy's not down on the ice unconscious, it's OK.

Originally Posted by lockman21 (Post 16331985)

Not quite.

Originally Posted by lockman21 (Post 16331969)

I agree with Matty.

That's all.

Originally Posted by TMoore4075 (Post 16332270)

This team is so bad right now.