GDT: Feb. 20 • Women's Gold Medal Game • Canada vs. United States • Pt IV
- Thread starter hatterson
- Start date
It sucks but the Americans were constantly turning it over and making too many mistakes. Canada although got help with a make up call in overtime to get into 3 on 3 Canada just simply was the better team hopefully that doesn't happen tomorrow.
sickest flow bro
Registered User
Right before I the Canadians got called with a cross check in OT I said to the guys at work, well the whistles will be put away boys. Then after I happened I said wow, they're actually going to call that in OT, I think they will owe us one and even it up. The only one I would have been OK with was the cross-check/trip on Wickenheiser. And I'd agree if they called the same penalty if it was on Canada. Think the ref got the memo not to call borderline calls and quickly evened it up. I really don't think she would have called that slash if she didn't just get Canada on a call.
my .02
my .02
Yeah I agree although if that does go in US fans sure have odds on their side to say well what were the chances Canada was gonna tie it at that point anyway? I think its roughly 6% of the time a team down by 1 with under 1:30 left ties the game.
The number of turnovers by the US in the defensive end was just mind boggling, exactly why I kept saying I don't know how the hell this is a 2-0 game, certainly the dumb penalty by Canada 10 seconds into the 3rd was a big reason for it, my guess is if that penalty does not occur Canada easily wins the game 2-1 or 3-1 in regulation because they were dominating late in the 2nd much as they were dominating before the US got the 1st goal.
Thanks. The World Cup is always exciting. A lot of my family is pulling for Portugal but my father and I are USA all the way
I'm glad the MLS is expanding and that they're getting some good players. Look forward to talking with you on tomorrow's game day thread. To be on topic: looking at those pictures of the women's team after the loss makes me feel so bad for them. I can only imagine being the pain they're feeling, 5 minutes away from a gold medal and then losing it all. That's tough
Alwalys
Phu m.
- May 19, 2010
- 25,894
- 6,140
Being that that would be a 3-0 goal and the game would have likely ended at 3-0 or 3-1, there would be no arguing otherwise. Pucks hit refs all the time and the refs get in the way all the time. That is a normal part of hockey. The player is equally responsible for avoiding the ref, and players can and do use refs to set picks. That is not an unfair situation because it has an equal chance to happen to either team.
A phantom call on the other hand is a deliberate act by the referee and thus is a patently unfair act.
Ward had the best hit of either Olympic hockey tournament.
Szabados is the best Tri-City American goalie who is in the Olympic tournament
Wickenheiser, Hefford and Ouellette apparently aren't too old.
Marie-Philip Poulin is 22 years old and has two Olympic gold medal winning goals.
That was a pretty entertaining game, the girls earned some beer and cigars.
Szabados is the best Tri-City American goalie who is in the Olympic tournament
Wickenheiser, Hefford and Ouellette apparently aren't too old.
Marie-Philip Poulin is 22 years old and has two Olympic gold medal winning goals.
That was a pretty entertaining game, the girls earned some beer and cigars.
CornKicker
Holland is wrong..except all of the good things
- Feb 18, 2005
- 12,197
- 3,692
Alwalys
Phu m.
- May 19, 2010
- 25,894
- 6,140
1) How many were on the PPs?
2) What are the underlying possession stats?
Please, every HF poster should know that shots are only so valuable as a stat.
2 goal lead is the worse lead there is....
A 2 goal lead is not bad at home, on the road its bad because you know if the opposition gets that 1st goal they're gonna be on you like maple syrup on pancakes for about the next 5 minutes after..to me its much like the first 5 minutes of a team's home opener or a game 3 in a playoff series...you're gonna get come at hard for 5-10 minutes. Its much different at home, without the crowd behind the team they're less likely to mount a massive flurry following the first goal.
Lady Scarlet
Registered User
It was NOT a phantom call. The precedent had been set by the warning given earlier. It's a shame the player in question was too stupid (or thought she'd get away with it) to heed the warning and as such, she paid for her own ignorance and stupidity. End of. Period. Perhaps her teammates and fans should be questioning her ability to heed instructions rather than assigning erroneous 'blame' when the player in question should be accepting their responsibility in the penalty being given.
You may feel you 'HAVE' to make that play, but you must also accept the consequences of your actions. Hence, the penalty being given after being warned by the referee to stop the behavior in question.
Don't know why this is so difficult for some to accept, I really don't.
Why there have been endless pages of debate over the reffing?
USA was up 2-0. They blew that lead in less than four minutes in the gold medal game of the Olympics which is literally the most important game of these player's entire lives up until this point. I'm not sure how the refs are the culprit here.
USA was up 2-0. They blew that lead in less than four minutes in the gold medal game of the Olympics which is literally the most important game of these player's entire lives up until this point. I'm not sure how the refs are the culprit here.
Alwalys
Phu m.
- May 19, 2010
- 25,894
- 6,140
It was a phantom and the whole world knows it. That was in no way a slash, it was deliberately not a slash. Canada knows it too but is afraid to admit it. It does cheapen the win, but you do go home with the gold so just suck it up.
Well, because reffing likely determined the outcome of the game. Canada scoring 2 goals is not surprising, as a baseline. One team having a bad 4 minute span of a game is also not surprising. Canada caught some good luck twice in that 4 minute span, which is also not surprising. But on the strength of their play throughout the game, the US despite all that, survived to go to OT to have a chance to win.
And they seized that chance, they dominated Canada in their zone in OT and drew a penalty. Then he ref called a phantom to even it up, which threw the momentum out the window and made it 3 on 3, which at best turned the result into a tossup (but really favored the team with the best individual players). Given that a 4 on 3 PP is a deadly advantage, especially when carrying the momentum, it is very likely that, had it been allowed to play out properly, the US would have won the game on that PP. At the very least, they would not have been in the situation to commit the subsequent penalties.
So the reffing did play a huge role in the outcome, and that's why people are talking about it.
Last edited:
CornKicker
Holland is wrong..except all of the good things
- Feb 18, 2005
- 12,197
- 3,692
not even sure, at the end of the day the team with the biggest hard and determination won the game. Super proud of the girls
CornKicker
Holland is wrong..except all of the good things
- Feb 18, 2005
- 12,197
- 3,692
CantHaveTkachev
Cap Space > NHL players
Lady Scarlet
Registered User
Crosbyfan
Wayne Gretzky "was" a great Ukrainian Canadian
- Nov 27, 2003
- 12,687
- 2,523
I think it is fair to say some would have claimed that Canada would not have tied it up anyway...so no biggie.
But in fairness I would also say we got the better of the bounces from late in the third on, refs and all considered...that puck hitting the post after the linesman interfering being an example.
CantHaveTkachev
Cap Space > NHL players
Latest posts
-
GDT: #63 | Jets at Flyers | Thursday, March 6, 2025 | 7:00 PM | NBCSP- Latest: Yukon Cornelius
-
