ZJames
Registered User
Yes.Are these teams (Calgary and Colorado) that bad on defense or was Quick that good?
Yes.Are these teams (Calgary and Colorado) that bad on defense or was Quick that good?
i don't necessarily have a problem with the rule but i think that would open up a whole nother can of worms even if it might be more fun to watchI think for skaters trying to get out - skating opposite direction of the play - they should let that go as they did. Offside's actually sucks in general. Having played some roller with no offsides you realize it kills a lot of creativity
At first I used to make fun of it.. but after awhile i developed a liking to it once I realized teams couldnt do what you mentioned... it never paid off to leave a guy in the o-zone or the d-zone.. systems naturally developed and just flowed similar to 3 on 3. Look for some Narch pro games on youtube for a taste. The NHL will never do that, but it was eye opening to play that way and not worry about tagging up or being slightly ahead of the play.i don't necessarily have a problem with the rule but i think that would open up a whole nother can of worms even if it might be more fun to watch
can't help but feel like an NHL coach might seriously just sit 5 back in the D zone as soon as they lose possession if they can't neutral zone trap any more. would definitely be interesting to see the systems changes though
I did say maybe he didn't make the playoffs often because he was playing for said non - playoff team.A little creative license going on there. When he was traded the Kings weren't in a playoff spot. And, one could reasonably conclude that had he stayed they would have been just another regular season failure.
Yeah baby!!!something odd about hearing 'closing the 5 hole on Hymen'
This is like the NBA before Jordan started making it defense first
The NHL has opened a can of worms by not calling the Makar goal back on an offsides. I think it is clear that he is possessing the puck even if his stick is not touching it.
Hell noYeah baby!!!
Kane’s contract is up. He fills two holes. Scoring and toughness. Get this guy.
Then get your LD.
Mike SmithThe over was 12.5.
14 goals scored.
Someone must've taken the over.
Evander Kane.The over was 12.5.
14 goals scored.
Someone must've taken the over.
We are so far away from competing against these high powered teams. I really hope the first round "success" doesn't sway the staff because it's clear we don't have any firepower to battle in these type of games, and we need it. We are going to need some young dynamic forwards.
Our only defense now are prayers for Quick that he can hold the fort or until our D gets more experience. I'am more optimistic about the defense though.
Going to be a big tell on the direction this team is going with the player(s) they will bring in, if any.
Not how the delayed offside works though.....it's something they've actually called consistently for years.
I was gonna say this is how I've understood the rule since I was a teenager 25 years ago...did it change along the way somewhere?
I can't count how many times i lightly pushed the puck into the zone and let it float until my guy touched up then went after it so I don't understand what I'm missing here other than an opportunity for Edmonton media to prove the world is out to get them
Maybe it's jsut that people don't do it as much anymore since standing up at the line is so popular?
I was gonna say this is how I've understood the rule since I was a teenager 25 years ago...did it change along the way somewhere?
I can't count how many times i lightly pushed the puck into the zone and let it float until my guy touched up then went after it so I don't understand what I'm missing here other than an opportunity for Edmonton media to prove the world is out to get them
Maybe it's jsut that people don't do it as much anymore since standing up at the line is so popular?
By rule 83.3, the play was off side because Makar tried to play the puck in the o zone during a delayed offside before his teammate tagged up. This is why the rules for a dump in don't apply.I was gonna say this is how I've understood the rule since I was a teenager 25 years ago...did it change along the way somewhere?
I can't count how many times i lightly pushed the puck into the zone and let it float until my guy touched up then went after it so I don't understand what I'm missing here other than an opportunity for Edmonton media to prove the world is out to get them
Maybe it's jsut that people don't do it as much anymore since standing up at the line is so popular?
By rule 83.3, the play was off side because Makar tried to play the puck in the o zone during a delayed offside before his teammate tagged up. This is why the rules for a dump in don't apply.
By rule 83.3, the play was off side because Makar tried to play the puck in the o zone during a delayed offside before his teammate tagged up. This is why the rules for a dump in don't apply.
If possession rules don't apply then Makar is attempting to play a loose puck because he isn't touching it and possession allows for control without contact.Incorrect, he has to be attempting to play.....a LOOSE puck...... was the puck loose?
Possession rules do not apply for delayed offside, only if it is touched. You can still have possession and not touch the puck.
When the Great One speaks, you listen.