Post-Game Talk: Controversy, thy name is Bruins vs Jets; Jets win 5-4 in SO

[Howard Chuck]

Wow, looked way worse at full speed. Almost looks like Morrisey makes awkward contact then falls forward. Not defending the hit but it doesn't look as bad as it originally did.

Morrissey was going for the puck right up until contact.

 

[Aavco Cup]

 

[Howard Chuck]

I don't want to see Morrissey suspended but he left his feet to make the play, which might lead to a suspension. With the NHL who knows what they will decide.

I see it as being surprise by the turn, duck & turtle.

 

[Saidin]

I don't want to see Morrissey suspended but he left his feet to make the play, which might lead to a suspension. With the NHL who knows what they will decide.

See I see him leaving his feet by the momentum of him going over the top of the ducking/turning Bruin. We see that ALL the time during those big hits and people always claim they left their feet but in reality the momentum of it took their skates off the ice.

To each his own I guess...

 

[cbcwpg]

IMO that challenge was a 50/50 decision but I would've challenged it as well probably. In a game where the stakes were higher, maybe not. Also I wasn't there - if it looked very clearly offside watching it by the rinkside and then the overhead view sort of half-confirmed that, that would affect the decision because in that case it would seem very likely the linecam they use for the reviews confirms it 100%

I have to say I don't like the challenge rule AT ALL. If a play is worthy to be challenged (like that one clearly was), a penalty for failing challenge is really harsh. Also I don't think reviewing offsides belongs in hockey. It's very very rare you see a blatant offside not being called, all of these challenges seem to be about half inches. Yeah, maybe sometimes it WAS an offside, but **** happens and play goes on. It very rarely makes a significant difference on a play if it was offside by half an inch. I don't think the offside rule was created for nitpicking about .5 inches nor needs that kind of accuracy to do it's job.

It wasn't. The intent of the challenge rule was to stop stuff like this...



If you want to be a dick and complain over being offside by half a millimeter... then you might just get a penalty for your trouble. The Jets basically got scored on twice because of a failed challenge. The original goal and the powerplay.

You challenge in the playoffs over something that close... it could cost you the cup.

 

[EpicGingy]

Hearings tend to be announced early in the morning following the incident, fines don't get announced until they're assessed typically. There's the occasional hearing announced immediately following a game in cases where the offending team's player could be playing the following day.

Here's the hit again at 50% speed followed by 25% speed, edited with more footage at 50% speed to show that there's no goofy editing going on. Clip starts when Morrissey takes his last stride in and begins gliding.




Regular speed video with audio

My opinion: The optics are far worse than the hit itself was.

The only reason Morrissey left his feet is because his momentum carried him over the body.

Without the duck it wouldn't have turned out as bad. Still a penalty, but not a brutal one.

 

[Howard Chuck]

The only reason Morrissey left his feet is because his momentum carried him over the body.

Without the duck it wouldn't have turned out as bad. Still a penalty, but not a brutal one.

I disagree. I don't know if it would have been a penalty even, definitely not a 5 min major. He was gliding and reaching for the puck. He didn't even line him up with his shoulder for the hit. Totally looked like he was reaching for the puck. I think it's nothing.

 

[SensibleGuy]

We win a game against one of the best teams in the league and people complain about a challenge?
Good grief Charlie Brown.

yeah, it's crazy! I mean it's not like there's anything non-repeatable about a Brandon Tanev short-handed hat trick goal or anything!

 

[GNP]

The Jet's really outplayed Boston, and if it wasn't for bad penalties, and a bad challenge in my opinion, we would have "easily" won that game. It's good to know that if they are one of the best teams in the league, we can handle them quite easily. They only scored on the power play -- if my memory is correct.

If Morrissey get's a 1 or 2 game suspension, it will be a blessing, and he can rest up his bruises for a playoff run. I don't believe he's missed a game all year. It's not the end of the world. It's also nice to see some passion in our players, if they believe other teams are taking shots at our star players -- instead of doing nothing.

With that being said, I hope the Boston player is ok.

 

[SensibleGuy]

Curious if he would of won the challenge and the goal was overturned what people would be thinking today...

what's there to be curious about? Presumably, if the challenge was successful then there must have been a camera angle that actually showed the play was offside - which would be all the validation I'd need for the original challenge...

 

[JetsWillFly4Ever]

No supplemental discipline for Morrissey

 

[Mortimer Snerd]

Challenge was fine. Positive expectation gamble. But the hit was super not cool.

Disagree challenge was fine. Since they attached the minor to a failed challenge they have effectively removed the off-side challenge from the game. Never challenge unless it is an obvious missed offside. If there is any doubt there should be no challenge. That's twice now that Maurice has challenged when it was waaaaayy too close.

Hit was a lot worse than just not cool. Left his feet, hit high, into the boards (or glass). And hit the wrong Bruin.

I expect he will get at least 1 game, maybe 2. Lucky he is not a repeat offender. If he had done it to Marchand, maybe DOPS lets him off with a reprimand. No? Well, they probably wouldn't go that way but they should.

 

[SensibleGuy]

No supplemental discipline for Morrissey

no big surprise.

 

[SensibleGuy]

Disagree challenge was fine. Since they attached the minor to a failed challenge they have effectively removed the off-side challenge from the game. Never challenge unless it is an obvious missed offside. If there is any doubt there should be no challenge. That's twice now that Maurice has challenged when it was waaaaayy too close.

Hit was a lot worse than just not cool. Left his feet, hit high, into the boards (or glass). And hit the wrong Bruin.

I expect he will get at least 1 game, maybe 2. Lucky he is not a repeat offender. If he had done it to Marchand, maybe DOPS lets him off with a reprimand. No? Well, they probably wouldn't go that way but they should.

agree on the challenge. Disagree on the hit.

 

[Mortimer Snerd]

The hell tsn

Ha! Jets/Sens, same/same. Both 4 letters in name, end with s, Canadian, not Toronto.

 

[Aavco Cup]

 

[surixon]

no big surprise.

Not surprised either. It was an attempted hockey play gone wrong.

 

[Mortimer Snerd]

The penalty for a lost offside challenge is too harsh. They should either get rid of the challenge entirely, or have the obvious ones automatically reviewed by the command center.

Agree the penalty is too harsh. IMO it amounts to having gotten rid of the challenge entirely. Hope Maurice has finally read the memo.

The fix, originally was obvious, I thought. Drop the requirement for the skate to be touching the ice. Break the plane is good enough. That can be seen on camera quite clearly.

 

[Mortimer Snerd]

At that time in the game and the situation the Jets were in Maurice should of not bothered

I don't think there is ever a time to challenge, faced with that penalty - unless it is an obvious, can't fail challenge.

 

[Jetfaninflorida]

It was kind of a influential part of the game. Is it really surprising it's being discussed? I love the win, I didn't love the challenge. I think there's room for both.

The challenge was in a word, dumb, given the 5 on 3 implications. We usually discuss the good, the bad, the ugly and the dumb of a game here, so don't be surprised.

 

[Ducky10]

The challenge was in a word, dumb, given the 5 on 3 implications. We usually discuss the good, the bad, the ugly and the dumb of a game here, so don't be surprised.

I'm not, that was my point.

 

[Ducky10]

No supplemental discipline for Morrissey

Thought he might face something for leaving his feet a bit, but this doesn't surprise me in the least.

 

[Mortimer Snerd]

That would surprise me. The vulnerable position thing doesn't excuse Morrissey leaving his feet or hitting high.

I don't usually advocate for stiffer penalties to our players but I think Morrissey earned some supplementary discipline this time.

DOPS is a bit of a joke. I guess if we are the beneficiaries this time I will take it. But I would prefer them to get their act together and hand out consistent, appropriate penalties.

 

[King Woodballs]

That would surprise me. The vulnerable position thing doesn't excuse Morrissey leaving his feet or hitting high.

I don't usually advocate for stiffer penalties to our players but I think Morrissey earned some supplementary discipline this time.

DOPS is a bit of a joke. I guess if we are the beneficiaries this time I will take it. But I would prefer them to get their act together and hand out consistent, appropriate penalties.

Morrissey left his feet because of the turn and duck
Lost his balance. He didn’t jump into the hit

 

[King Woodballs]

The salty bruins fans is a great read on the main board thread.

I am happy with the no suspension the more and more I see the play.