GDT: Blue Jackets @ Habs • War of 1812 edition • Dec 1, 19h30 ET • Centre Bell • RDS, SNE

Status
Not open for further replies.

CH25

Self-proclaimed Habs connoisseur
Apr 12, 2010
14,364
1,921
Montreal
5 D for the rest of the game. Odds are stacked against the Habs now with Condon in net.
 

Hoople

Registered User
Mar 7, 2011
16,193
121
Markov playing so poorly it's unbelievable.
WTF is up with him lately...

Dont ignore PK as well. If you watch the replay of the goal, even if Condon stopped the wrap-around, it would have been a tap in by the Jackets forward that PK lost and was standing in the crease with PK behind him.

That pairing is great offensively but have been playing weak defensively.
 

Boardish

Registered User
Mar 3, 2004
4,486
2,472
5 and a game are only given when the player is injured. Calvert had the wind knocked out of him. It should not have been called a game misconduct.
Terrible terrible call.
 

Hackett

BAKAMAN
Mar 4, 2002
21,545
9
Visit site
I saw the replay again and I still don't understand the 5 min. 2 min at most and heck I wouldn't even give that.

Don't kid yourself, its a penalty. The puck was not close enough to say otherwise

Whether the puck was deflected, or it was just a bad read, it doesn't matter either way, its interference.

It's just not a 5 min penalty and a game misconduct.
 

Lafleurs Guy

Guuuuuuuy!
Jul 20, 2007
78,625
50,029
Looking at the replay and how hard the guy got hit, I'm just fine with that being a five minute penalty. Blindside hits need to be thrown out of the game. He didn't just nudge the guy.
 

LaP

Registered User
Jun 27, 2012
26,220
20,480
Quebec City, Canada
i'm thinking there might be a notion of "he hit a guy that was completely out of the play, therefore he wanted to hurt him, therefore he gets a 5"

I wish RDS would dig up the rule book right now instead of talking about ****ing emails

Pretty much everything can be a 5 if the ref believes there's an intention to injure the other player. That's not new. But it's almost never used unless this is an out of ordinary play. This was not the case here. The head was not the point of contact. There was no charge. It was not behind the player and there was no cross check.

That's a 2 there's absolutely no doubt. But i've never ever seen a play like that called for a 5. The only reason the puck was not there is because the pass was deflected there's no intention to injure the other player here.

Couple of years ago Neil hit an unsuspecting Markov behind the net after he made a pass along the board. Like a good 3 seconds after. The puck was almost at the red line on the stick of another player when it happened. The call was a 2 minutes for interference.
 

lamp9post

Registered User
Jan 28, 2007
4,460
1,773
LOL, I can't imagine what some of the reactions would have been around here in the summer if we were told that Byron-Flynn-Thomas would be our 4th line.
 

CH25

Self-proclaimed Habs connoisseur
Apr 12, 2010
14,364
1,921
Montreal
Almost 37 years old and his knees are 47. He is having issues on D for sure. Since October 24 he is a -8 in 18 games and counting :help: 9 points is nice but he had 9 in his first 8 games and a crazy +14.

Cmon man we're lucky to have him even at his age. It's hard to find a better top pair in the league.
 

Hoople

Registered User
Mar 7, 2011
16,193
121
Looking at the replay and how hard the guy got hit, I'm just fine with that being a five minute penalty. Blindside hits need to be thrown out of the game. He didn't just nudge the guy.

:help::help::shakehead:shakehead

I expect posts like this from Bruins fans.
 

Compile

Registered User
Feb 27, 2008
4,191
149
In an Igloo
Don't kid yourself, its a penalty. The puck was not close enough to say otherwise

Whether the puck was deflected, or it was just a bad read, it doesn't matter either way, its interference.

It's just not a 5 min penalty and a game misconduct.

If Emelin didn't move his body at all it would have been a collision.

This **** happens 10x a game. Lawl.
 

Youppi ki yay

Registered User
Oct 3, 2011
1,125
344
NB
Good interview Paul

beetlejuice-beetlejuice-the-movie-1081504_848_477.jpg
 

Lafleurs Guy

Guuuuuuuy!
Jul 20, 2007
78,625
50,029
Pretty much everything can be a 5 if the ref believes there's an intention to injure the other player. That's not new. But it's almost never used unless this is an out of ordinary play. This was not the case here. The head was not the point of contact. There was no charge. It was not behind the player and there was no cross check.

That's a 2 there's absolutely no doubt. But i've never ever seen a play like that called for a 5. The only reason the puck was not there is because the pass was deflected there's no intention to injure the other player here.

Couple of years ago Neil hit an unsuspecting Markov behind the net after he made a pass along the board. Like a good 3 seconds after. The puck was almost at the red line on the stick of another player when it happened. The call was a 2 minutes for interference.
It's a new league though. We're seeing a lot more of these kinds of calls now. Hits that would've been praised ten years ago can now land you a suspension. I have zero problem with the league looking to take that kind of stuff out of the game.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad