Toggle sidebar

GDT: Feb. 20 • Women's Gold Medal Game • Canada vs. United States • Pt IV

  • Xenforo Cloud has upgraded us to version 2.3.6. Please report any issues you experience.
ghostingtaro said:
Don't forget the lineswoman gave a chance to team USA to put it away during the empty netter, but apparently that is irrelevant. Not Canadas fault it missed huh?
Click to expand...

The US lost this game, it wasn't the refs, or anyone else's fault. In the first 4-5 minutes of OT they must have had 4-5 close in shots from just outside the crease and did not score. This loss was on the US coaching squad and the players as I listed above, but the issues will be fixed by 2018. Canada won the first bunch of men's hockey golds and then the rest of the world caught up. Same thing will happen with women's.
 
nystromshairstylist said:
The US lost this game, it wasn't the refs, or anyone else's fault. In the first 4-5 minutes of OT they must have had 4-5 close in shots from just outside the crease and did not score. This loss was on the US coaching squad and the players as I listed above, but the issues will be fixed by 2018. Canada won the first bunch of men's hockey golds and then the rest of the world caught up. Same thing will happen with women's.
Click to expand...

You go ahead and tell the bitter fans that. It's all on the refs that USA lost. 1st goal was a lucky deflection but the 2nd goal the team pretty much collapsed.
 
ghostingtaro said:
You go ahead and tell the bitter fans that. It's all on the refs that USA lost. 1st goal was a lucky deflection but the 2nd goal the team pretty much collapsed.
Click to expand...

Sorry but I watched the whole game twice, and I'm american. The refs did not cause the US to play passively, nor did they cause the US to allow canadian players to skate right up within 12 feet of the crease unmolested and shoot.

No, this was on the US, they dropped the ball with 3 minutes left. Hopefully, the national program will learn from this, and use it as motivation to work harder, coach better, and play smarter next time.
 
Mant said:
Another gold given to canada by the world's worst officiating.
Click to expand...

You cant call that in OT and if your gonna call it in OT call the interference in the 3rd that kept the puck in that let Canada tie the game. In the end the refs should not be a factor but they were so incompetent they couldn't get out of the players way and almost gave the US the gold on an empty netter. instead their incompetence gave it to Canada on a 5-3 but really a 4-3.
 
Pretty much am in agreement with a lot of people that the "slashing" penalty was nonsense that started the turn of events in OT. You play the game to the whistle.

Also, even if there was a "slash", there is no sense in calling penalties at all if suddenly you're going to be calling ultratight nitpicking penalties simply because the team that committed the "infraction" is on the PP in OT. Refs need to either make consistently average infractions or don't call anything at all and let them play like you were doing in the 3rd period.

I don't even feel bad for the USA women's team at all, either. Losing like this is a harsh lesson, and from now on I hope we will forever see them play a hard and focused 60 minutes of hockey.

The US women's team lost because they played hockey for 57 minutes. Never mind the OT controversies.
 
ive rewatched the whole game and quite frankly, here are my general takeaways:

-usa loves to run the cdn goalie including a wack or two after the goalie has secured the save. in the women's game, that's a no no and while the 'slash' in OT was minimal, it happened numerous times during the game without being called a penalty. it was a questionable call given the timing though.

-the usa never would have hit the post on the empty netter had the linesman not been in the way. breaks go both ways.

-the hilary knight play with wickenheiser imo was a textbook penalty shot. knight's legs caught wickenheiser and prevented a breakaway chance.
 
SouthernHab said:
Classy reply to the media from Team USA coach....

"After the game, the Americans did not blame the officials for their loss, but Coach Katey Stone put the officiating in the context of the pursuit to expand the women’s game.

“I think officiating is no different than developing players and programs,†she said. “The game is growing in leaps and bounds. The pace of the game is tremendous.

“We have to make sure that every part of the game operation and game management is developing at as fast a rate as it possibly can.â€

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/02/21/s...-beat-us-in-overtime-for-gold-medal.html?_r=0

In a nice and polite way, she said that the referees were clueless.

:):)
Click to expand...

It's absolutely true. In the two Canada/US games the refs seemed overwhelmed. The game was just seeming to move too fast for them.

Part of that is because of the talent gap between Canada/US and all other women's programs. It would be like a ref spending all his life reffing AHL games and then suddenly being tossed into a SCF match. He'd be overwhelmed by the speed of the game and be prone to making mistakes because he's not trained/used to the circumstances.

The solution, at least until other programs catch up closer to Canada/US, would either be to have the "elite" women's refs cycle through some men's games so that they can get used to a higher speed atmosphere or to use men's refs for the Canada/US games. Also going to a two ref system would help with the single ref being extremely out of position.

I'd like to see the overall level of officiating improved so that next time these two meet, the ref(s) don't look so overwhelmed.
 
one problem i see is that the big games like this should have the Best officials, not the best female officials
 
Mant said:
Another gold given to canada by the world's worst officiating.
Click to expand...

I disagree. The deflected goal that started the comeback is either faultless or the American's fault for not executing the "trap" properly.

I need to rewatch goal #2, but Poulin is a goal scorer and she pots them when she needs to. The Americans were also defending a 6-on-5 and couldn't defend the score when it counted. OT never should have happened in the first place had the Americans played for the full 60 minutes.
 
hyster110 said:
one problem i see is that the big games like this should have the Best officials, not the best female officials
Click to expand...

I agree, but thats going to start a terrible "sexist" controversy. In this day and age, its more important to be politically correct then it is to have a competition be called fairly by the fairest individuals. Sad, but its true.
 
RainbowDash said:
Pretty much am in agreement with a lot of people that the "slashing" penalty was nonsense that started the turn of events in OT. You play the game to the whistle.

Also, even if there was a "slash", there is no sense in calling penalties at all if suddenly you're going to be calling ultratight nitpicking penalties simply because the team that committed the "infraction" is on the PP in OT. Refs need to either make consistently average infractions or don't call anything at all and let them play like you were doing in the 3rd period.

I don't even feel bad for the USA women's team at all, either. Losing like this is a harsh lesson, and from now on I hope we will forever see them play a hard and focused 60 minutes of hockey.

The US women's team lost because they played hockey for 57 minutes. Never mind the OT controversies.
Click to expand...

But once you are warned by the refs to not do something and go ahead and do it anyway that's a different story. She tried to call what she thought was a bluff by the refs and paid the price in the end.

But I do agree with you that if they had played a full 60 minutes this wouldn't even be a point of conversation.
 
How can Knight shamelessly lie and say she didnt touch Wickenheiser? Everyone sees she did. At least lie and say it was incidental contact or something. Shes lost all creditably
 
redgrant said:
How can Knight shamelessly lie and say she didnt touch Wickenheiser? Everyone sees she did. At least lie and say it was incidental contact or something. Shes lost all creditably
Click to expand...

No kidding, as if anyone would dive if they had a breakaway in overtime. Typical poor loser.
 
I watched the first period, and OT.
I have to say, Canada's goalie, was incredible!

I think the ref was awful in OT, but refs are always awful:laugh:

Best part about Non judge sports, is the score, is the score.
Congrats to Team Canada women,
and PLEASE, can we get revenge in the men's semi?????:nod:

Can't wait, it's really the big game for me!!!!!
I want gold and all, but....;)
 
RainbowDash said:
Pretty much am in agreement with a lot of people that the "slashing" penalty was nonsense that started the turn of events in OT. You play the game to the whistle.

Also, even if there was a "slash", there is no sense in calling penalties at all if suddenly you're going to be calling ultratight nitpicking penalties simply because the team that committed the "infraction" is on the PP in OT. Refs need to either make consistently average infractions or don't call anything at all and let them play like you were doing in the 3rd period.

I don't even feel bad for the USA women's team at all, either. Losing like this is a harsh lesson, and from now on I hope we will forever see them play a hard and focused 60 minutes of hockey.

The US women's team lost because they played hockey for 57 minutes. Never mind the OT controversies.
Click to expand...

There has been some bad blood between the teams that even included a line brawl. One tactic used was to run the goalies and the officials were well aware of it. Hell, they even warned the Americans not to keep it up. I have no problem with the slashing call (or the roughing one given to Canada moments before) except for the fact that they would never be called against the men.

Edit... the slash earlier in the game was much worse imo.
 
I'm surprised not more has been made about the fact that the Knight penalty was called as cross-checking, not tripping. To me anyways, that indicates that the ref wasn't sure about what happened - she didn't see it clearly or maybe it happened too fast for her to process.

In other words, she guessed.

Now in terms of "justice" (if you will), it didn't matter because a penalty was deserved.

But the mere fact that the ref guessed on that type of play in the GMG - that's pretty brutal.

And this is coming from a Canadian.
 
KevyD said:
As I said elsewhere, I watched it 200 times. I was hypnotised by it. I still cannot believe it did not go in.
Click to expand...

That was collective result of 30 million Canadians watching and willing the puck just to wobble a few CMs wide! The power of positive thinking! :yo:





Or it could have been bad ice...
 
I heard that there was some chirping between the two sides during the medal ceremonies. That is too bad if true. I know they both dislike each other but they should leave it in the game.
 
BMOK33 said:
Breakaways as a whole tend to be scored on way more frequently than PSs because many of them are a result of a giveaway that occurs either in the defensive end or just outside of it so the goalie simply does not have time to properly get set and the shooter has an advantage...overall the shooter has an advantage even on breakaways that occur from further down the ice because he or she does not have time to overthink things its pure instinct, penalty shots the goalies have a marked edge and the numbers over the years show that. Thats why to me as a defender if you know you're beat you should always haul down the skater, take the PS over the breakaway in game any day.
Click to expand...

Lepardi said:
I finally found some stats on this matter, and they certainly make your view seem highly peculiar:
http://sports.stackexchange.com/que...sult-in-a-goal-a-penalty-shot-or-a-power-play

From 2005 to 2013 in the NHL the conversion rate for penalty shots was 33.4%, and for power plays it was 17.7%
Click to expand...

This:

PatriceBergeronFan said:
What about power plays for Canada or America on international ice? Edit:Females, that is.
Click to expand...

Females do not seem to shoot anywhere near as well as men, I think by default their chance of beating the goalie 1 on 1 is much lower, and you have to compare it to 4 on 3 pps which convert at a higher rate.

Madam Kadri said:
Well, I found the call to be perfectly acceptable(even though it was misnamed) and I'm an American. I blame the penalty more on Knight's poor choice to try and skate around Wickenheiser instead keep a straight line and aiming just to get her stick on the puck before Wickenheiser could.
Click to expand...

We're talking about the phantom slash, which is the really bush call.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Top Bottom