It was a horrendous call, but still. Vegas. Come on. When was the last time you saw three goals on a 5-minute PP? Four goals? I don't remember four goals. And in that spot. It literally cannot happen.
Around The NHL: Part X – DAL-STL / COL-SJ / CBJ-BOS / CAR-NYI
- Thread starter aufheben
- Start date
-
Xenforo Cloud will be upgrading us to version 2.3.5 on March 3rd at 12 AM GMT. This version has increased stability and fixes several bugs. We expect downtime for the duration of the update. The admin team will continue to work on existing issues, templates and upgrade all necessary available addons to minimize impact of this new version. Click Here for Updates
- Status
TheTakedown
Puck is Life
- Jul 11, 2012
- 13,694
- 1,493
Devils gave up 3 in the 2012 Final against the Kings on that Bernier Penalty
HockeyBasedNYC
Feeling it
Bad call or not Vegas totally imploded. Agree that it was a horrific call, but it didn't affect the outcome as much as the the non-call in the Saints game. Not with a 3 goal cushion. If it was a 1 goal game, id say yeah. Whens the last time 4 goals were scored on a 5 min major? Hell, when was the last time 3 goals were scored?
But, those match penalties should be reviewed. The other thing that is being lost is that Eakin was tossed from the game. For a shove off the faceoff. Not only is the other team given a 5 minute power play but you lose a player. In the playoffs and potential overtime games thats huge. Just because someone is seriously injured doesnt mean someone on the other team HAS to pay for it. Too much of a snap judgement.
But theres a lot of bitching about the call from Vegas. Haven't heard anything about how the Vegas PK and Fluery had a total meltdown.
But, those match penalties should be reviewed. The other thing that is being lost is that Eakin was tossed from the game. For a shove off the faceoff. Not only is the other team given a 5 minute power play but you lose a player. In the playoffs and potential overtime games thats huge. Just because someone is seriously injured doesnt mean someone on the other team HAS to pay for it. Too much of a snap judgement.
But theres a lot of bitching about the call from Vegas. Haven't heard anything about how the Vegas PK and Fluery had a total meltdown.
Tawnos
A guy with a bass
It's funny, I like seeing people say this, because I personally have always believed you can say the same thing about any controversial call. This one is a particularly egregious sure, but it's pretty much always true.
When the Rangers got screwed on that call in the SCF, they still failed to hold the lead against the Kings or score another goal themselves. It was on them, not the refs.
Tawnos
A guy with a bass
Yes. Vegas winning would've just guaranteed that the pick moves up, but if Colorado wins against SJ it's the same thing anyway. Ditto Columbus and Carolina (if Carolina wins tonight).
TheTakedown
Puck is Life
- Jul 11, 2012
- 13,694
- 1,493
Irishguy42
Mr. Preachy
Block More Shots
Registered User
Yeah, that's a 2 minute penalty, hands down. That push from Eakin happens sometimes as players battle off the faceoff... I've actually seen similar plays in the past where there's no penalty called at all. The 5 and a game was given because of the result of the play. It's just an unfortunate circumstance because Pavelski seemed to really get hurt, hoping for a quick recovery.
Yeah. That's 2 minute cross checking. If it wasn't for Statsny knocking Pavelski down so hard(inadvertant or otherwise) it likely would have only been 2 minutes.
AT BEST (and that's being generous), it's a 2 minute minor.
I'm also pissed because our draft pick number would have gone up by 1.
I'm also pissed because our draft pick number would have gone up by 1.
TheTakedown
Puck is Life
- Jul 11, 2012
- 13,694
- 1,493
Good post on the main board:
Whether or not the rules define it, the "discretion" rule usually at the very least takes into account an injury that happened on the play. Same thing as a suspension assessment by NHL DPS.
Whether or not the rules define it, the "discretion" rule usually at the very least takes into account an injury that happened on the play. Same thing as a suspension assessment by NHL DPS.
Gresch04
Registered User
- Feb 12, 2009
- 2,127
- 1,939
Blaming the refs is not childish. The game was OVER. The sharks rallied around a player they thought was badly injured. The energy and momentum came from the refs. Period. It was a terrible call they changed the outcome. What is WORSE than that?
Oscar Lindberg
Registered User
Eh I have no sympathy for Vegas.
Like some have said here, don’t do dumb shit if you’re not willing to pay for it. No reason Stasny and Eakin needed to hit Pavelski up high
They were going to win, all they had to do was play normally for the rest of the third
And it didn’t help that Fleury couldn’t stop a beach ball
Like some have said here, don’t do dumb shit if you’re not willing to pay for it. No reason Stasny and Eakin needed to hit Pavelski up high
They were going to win, all they had to do was play normally for the rest of the third
And it didn’t help that Fleury couldn’t stop a beach ball
Zibanejbread
Rebuilding.
To play devil's advocate, why didn't Foegele get a penalty when he cross checked Oshie in the back and he broke his clavicle after crashing into the boards?
The Crypto Guy
Registered User
- Jun 26, 2017
- 29,205
- 38,882
Woof, what a absolute brutal call on that major.
To think that call helped end a season for a team.
4 officials out there and they somehow managed to get that wrong is unacceptable. Probably thought "oh its 3-0, we'll just give them this bone to shut the fans up"...ooops that backfired. Pretty confident you won't see those refs in the 2nd round.
To think that call helped end a season for a team.
4 officials out there and they somehow managed to get that wrong is unacceptable. Probably thought "oh its 3-0, we'll just give them this bone to shut the fans up"...ooops that backfired. Pretty confident you won't see those refs in the 2nd round.
Rongomania
Registered User
Tawnos
A guy with a bass
aufheben
#Norris4Fox
These are the rules for the Eakins penalties below. Whether or not the call was right, the continuous major penalty needs to go. That was just a farce.
SECTION 8 – STICK FOULS (p.87)
Rule 59 – Cross-checking (p.87)
59.1 Cross-checking - The action of using the shaft of the stick between
the two hands to forcefully check an opponent.
59.2 Minor Penalty - A minor penalty, at the discretion of the Referee
based on the severity of the contact, shall be imposed on a player
who “cross checks” an opponent.
59.3 Major Penalty - A major penalty, at the discretion of the Referee
based on the severity of the contact, shall be imposed on a player
who “cross checks” an opponent (see 59.5).
59.4 Match Penalty – The Referee, at his discretion, may assess a match
penalty if, in his judgment, the player attempted to or deliberately
injured his opponent by cross-checking.
59.5 Game Misconduct Penalty - When a major penalty is assessed for
cross-checking, an automatic game misconduct penalty shall be
imposed on the offending player.
59.6 Fines and Suspensions - When a major penalty is imposed under
this rule, an automatic fine of one hundred dollars ($100) shall also be
imposed.
If deemed appropriate, supplementary discipline can be applied by
the Commissioner at his discretion (refer to Rule 28).
REFERENCE TABLES (p.135)
TABLE 6 (p.137)
(Rule 20 – Major Penalties)
SUMMARY OF MAJOR PENALTIES THAT RESULT IN AN AUTOMATIC GAME MISCONDUCT
Description (Rule)
(i) Butt-ending (Rule 58)
(ii) Checking from behind (Rule 43)
(iii) Clipping (Rule 44)
(iv) Cross-checking (Rule 59)
(v) Fighting (after original altercation) (Rule 46)
(vi) Fighting (when aggressor) (Rule 46)
The nhl.com Game Summary has this listed for the penalties:
[TBODY]
[/TBODY]
SECTION 8 – STICK FOULS (p.87)
Rule 59 – Cross-checking (p.87)
59.1 Cross-checking - The action of using the shaft of the stick between
the two hands to forcefully check an opponent.
59.2 Minor Penalty - A minor penalty, at the discretion of the Referee
based on the severity of the contact, shall be imposed on a player
who “cross checks” an opponent.
59.3 Major Penalty - A major penalty, at the discretion of the Referee
based on the severity of the contact, shall be imposed on a player
who “cross checks” an opponent (see 59.5).
59.4 Match Penalty – The Referee, at his discretion, may assess a match
penalty if, in his judgment, the player attempted to or deliberately
injured his opponent by cross-checking.
59.5 Game Misconduct Penalty - When a major penalty is assessed for
cross-checking, an automatic game misconduct penalty shall be
imposed on the offending player.
59.6 Fines and Suspensions - When a major penalty is imposed under
this rule, an automatic fine of one hundred dollars ($100) shall also be
imposed.
If deemed appropriate, supplementary discipline can be applied by
the Commissioner at his discretion (refer to Rule 28).
REFERENCE TABLES (p.135)
TABLE 6 (p.137)
(Rule 20 – Major Penalties)
SUMMARY OF MAJOR PENALTIES THAT RESULT IN AN AUTOMATIC GAME MISCONDUCT
Description (Rule)
(i) Butt-ending (Rule 58)
(ii) Checking from behind (Rule 43)
(iii) Clipping (Rule 44)
(iv) Cross-checking (Rule 59)
(v) Fighting (after original altercation) (Rule 46)
(vi) Fighting (when aggressor) (Rule 46)
The nhl.com Game Summary has this listed for the penalties:
| 5 | 3 | 9:13 |
| 5 | Cross checking (maj) | ||||
| 6 | 3 | 9:13 |
| 10 | Game Misconduct |
- Status
Latest posts
-
Speculation: Roster Building thread - Part XVII - (TDL is March 7th)- Latest: GoAwayPanarin
-
