GDT: 2017 Stanley Cup Playoffs thread

[Anton Dubinchuk]

11 shots on goal

5 goals

What a joke

 

[Oogie Boogie]

Absolutely pathetic.

 

[Unsustainable]

Shooting percentages are in Pittsburghs favors

 

[Joe McGrath]

Glove high? Glove High.

 

[Cardiac Jerks]

Don Cherry said Nashville wouldn't be able to win if they gave up 45 shots to Pittsburgh.

It only took 11.

 

[Wolfpuck]

100% undeserved

 

[Joe McGrath]

Never understood why goalies go down in the butterfly there.

Because if they don't the guy can pick either corner along the ice?

 

[CandyCanes]

Pittsburgh must be really channeling in the Hunger Games lady that says "May the odds b May the odds be ever in your favor". 5 goals, 12 shots... wtf those are crazy odds

 

[Brock Anton]

Because if they don't the guy can pick either corner along the ice?

Well, he left one wide open by going down.

 

[Lempo]

 

[Breakdowns]

These refs, they are so bad...

I am pretty sure for offside challenge there had to be conclusive evidence to overturn call on the ice - I am not sure that they can see conclusive evidence on iPad, when I was not sure while watching on Full HD 22 inch monitor. And let`s not even talk about other calls or no calls.

 

[tarheelhockey]

We've been saying all season in offside-review threads that some dumb **** like that would happen in the Finals. One game in and it has already happened. Let's see if it comes up again.

 

[Sens1Canes2]

We've been saying all season in offside-review threads that some dumb **** like that would happen in the Finals. One game in and it has already happened. Let's see if it comes up again.

Is it dumb if it's the right call? Most everyone I saw make comments on it (media, players) said it was offside. I agree.

 

[tarheelhockey]

Is it dumb if it's the right call? Most everyone I saw make comments on it (media, players) said it was offside. I agree.

It's dumb that it's reviewable in the first place. The concept of offside wasn't developed with this micrometer-level scrutiny in mind. So yes, it can be "correct" and still be mind-numbingly stupid. Can't wait to see them call off a Game 7 OT celebration because someone lifted his trailing edge a split-second too soon.

 

[Sens1Canes2]

It's dumb that it's reviewable in the first place. The concept of offside wasn't developed with this micrometer-level scrutiny in mind. So yes, it can be "correct" and still be mind-numbingly stupid. Can't wait to see them call off a Game 7 OT celebration because someone lifted his trailing edge a split-second too soon.

In that case they'd just hurry Bettman and the red carpet onto the ice....sorry, Sabres fans.

I get what you were saying, but the flipside would be a game seven overtime goal where the play is clearly offside and yet there's no review. That outcome is much worse than a goal being called off because of a correct offside review. In my opinion anyway.

 

[tarheelhockey]

I get what you were saying, but the flipside would be a game seven overtime goal where the play is clearly offside and yet there's no review. That outcome is much worse than a goal being called off because of a correct offside review. In my opinion anyway.

This has happened before and it's one of the most famous goals in hockey history and nobody really cares that it was offside. It's just a thing to mention when talking about an awesome goal.

 

[Joe McGrath]

The only reason it exists is because one linesman was so incompetent he missed Duchene being offside by 3 feet and a goal was scored.

And the immediate reaction was "how is that not reviewable". Now here we are.

 

[Ole Gil]

Is it dumb if it's the right call? Most everyone I saw make comments on it (media, players) said it was offside. I agree.

I think the argument would be the margin of error likely had no impact on the result, which is the real purpose of the rule. It's to keep people from skating in way ahead of the play. The advantage gained by having your skate an inch off the ice is nothing, which is why reviewing plays like that seems dumb to me.

I think if the margin of error is small enough that a ref can reasonably get it wrong, then it's not really affecting the play in a way the rule was designed to prevent. (this is related to offsides. Not things like puck going in, or goalie interference, where the cost of getting it wrong is 1 goal).

 

[cptjeff]

Plus, the way the rule is written, the puck doesn't even have to cross into the zone first if you have control of it. You can skate into the zone backwards if you have control of the puck and it's not offside even if your entire body is in the offensive zone before the puck. If the offsides review continues to exist, they should change the standard to avoid calling back exactly that goal. No the skate was a millimeter off the ice bull****, only overturn when it's Duchene level wrong.

 

[RodTheBawd]

Make the blueline vertical.
Negate any offsides reviews as soon as the defending team gains possession.

A bit specific to this instance, but common sense changes.

 

[cptjeff]

Make the blueline vertical.
Negate any offsides reviews as soon as the defending team gains possession.

A bit specific to this instance, but common sense changes.

I'd also put a hard cap of, say, 20 seconds. If the zone entry was more than 20 seconds before the goal, then you've had time to get back in the zone and establish your defensive system, and the league ain't gonna bail you out three minutes later.

 

[Navin R Slavin]

It's dumb that it's reviewable in the first place. The concept of offside wasn't developed with this micrometer-level scrutiny in mind. So yes, it can be "correct" and still be mind-numbingly stupid. Can't wait to see them call off a Game 7 OT celebration because someone lifted his trailing edge a split-second too soon.

Buffalo fans would like to have a word with you.

 

[tarheelhockey]

Buffalo fans would like to have a word with you.

Buffalo fans' problem is that the league (correctly) softened the rule mid-season and the organization told the fans a lie that they knew nothing about it.

 

[Joe McGrath]

Buffalo fans' problem is that the league (correctly) softened the rule mid-season and the organization told the fans a lie that they knew nothing about it.

I thought it was that season the Bruins lost an OT game when they had one called back where the guys toe was in the crease on the opposite side of the net where the goal happened. I believe it was against Washington? Maybe it was a different year IDK.

Edit: Yep prior year.

 

[Carolinas Identity*]

did not watch last note

sounds like i did not miss anything