Post-Game Talk: Leafs overcome the refs and steal a win

wingman75

Registered User
Dec 3, 2008
6,515
7,056
The QC
So we scratched Robertson for Steeves to achieve what exactly?
Steeves is such a limited player and has no standout skill in the NHL to be playing ahead of someone like Robertson.
I actually liked Steeves game. Considering it was his first game, I thought he showed he could effective. He was quick, making decisions and getting to pucks. Played under control all night and was effective when involved in a play. Didn't get caught in any terrible positions. I'd like to see more.
 

Jimmy Firecracker

They Fired Sheldon!
Mar 30, 2010
37,522
38,776
Mississauga
Not sure that record is indicative of anything but good fortune, who is going to have a +50% PP over 3 or 4 games, I think they scored something like 1, 5 on 5 goal over that hot stretch but something like 7 or 8 PP goals. Without that red hot PP our recored would be sub .500.

Sure the PP has been hot but the first few games it was abysmal. How would our record work if it wasn’t operating at sub 10 percent? Can easily say our middling record to start the year was a result of bad fortune.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jojalu

1specter

Registered User
Sep 27, 2016
12,220
18,341
So we scratched Robertson for Steeves to achieve what exactly?
Steeves is such a limited player and has no standout skill in the NHL to be playing ahead of someone like Robertson.
Steeves looked good last night, strange take. Robertson should draw back in but not at the expense of Steeves.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Seath The Scaleless

Fogelhund

Registered User
Sep 15, 2007
23,320
27,462
So we scratched Robertson for Steeves to achieve what exactly?
Steeves is such a limited player and has no standout skill in the NHL to be playing ahead of someone like Robertson.
What was your bar, for him to stay in the lineup?
 

Hellcat

Registered User
Jul 13, 2022
3,040
2,742
Sure the PP has been hot but the first few games it was abysmal. How would our record work if it wasn’t operating at sub 10 percent? Can easily say our middling record to start the year was a result of bad fortune.

You could for sure, all I'm saying is our last 10 games record is not indicative of good play.
 

therealkoho

Him/Leaf/fan
Jul 10, 2009
17,713
8,791
the Prior
6/8 points in 2 sets of back to backs in a row without Matthews.

Good thing they took yesterday off to have the energy for today's OT.
Hmmm strange thing that, especially when I'm sure in the last few days that someone was saying how desperately they needed the new captain back. I think we've looked just as good with the actual captain in the line-up!

All I know is that right now there's a rocking chair at the Shady Acres Rest Home that an old orange tabby is sleeping in who's dreaming about its owner coming back someday. Not too soon we hope🫠
 

Twine Tickler

Registered User
Apr 5, 2010
3,496
5,353
Vancouver
According to the rules, all three calls (all four, including the non-penalty on Knies) were correct. The most marginal one was the Washington interference call.

Berube put Willy on the top line with Domi and Knies, and Mitch with JT and McMann, and they each had a goal and an assist.

I think the biggest difference I've seen is that in most games, whether ahead or behind, the team seems mentally stable. Leads are safer, and even when we give up a goal to make it close we don't collapse. Despite the sturm und drang on the GDT last night, we looked pretty good in the third, and got stronger as the game wore on.
I disagree on the calls to be honest. I think the only one I can live with was the Knies high stick. The call on the ice was no goal, and there was clearly no indisputable evidence to overturn. Not sure how the ref in the corner with both Knies and his defender's back facing him was able to determine that was high from his angle, but nonetheless the call was made. If he calls it a goal, there is not enough evidence to overturn the other way as well.

As for the Carlson and Lorentz no goals, those are complete garbage IMO.

That said, I do agree with your assessment on the third period. I really think Thompson kept the caps in the game at times. It wasn't like we dominated the entirety of the 3rd, but we did have some high quality looks that we didn't convert on. Luckily we found a way.

It definitely was not picture perfect, but it's a solid gutsy win against a quality opponent on the 2nd half of a B2B with travel. Really can't complain.
 

therealkoho

Him/Leaf/fan
Jul 10, 2009
17,713
8,791
the Prior
he has embraced his speed issues much better this year, it is early and time will tell how it goes, but he has shocked the shit out of me with his play

for sure thought we were going to see ~50 points with optimal offenive usage
Over the last 3 or so years, he has changed his training methodology and has been learning how to skate again. You have to hand it to the guy, post 30 years old and hires a skating instructor to fix 20 or so years of bad habits. He may never become like some of the speed merchants in the game, but he's now one of the faster guys on the team. Talk about being a consummate pro.

He's a great example to all the guys on the team, now if they can get some of the awkwardness out of Lorentz' stride and improve his acceleration and balance, he might someday be able to move up 2 lines.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 1specter

therealkoho

Him/Leaf/fan
Jul 10, 2009
17,713
8,791
the Prior
Best part was Jerry Jones before the game being asked about Dallas losing again, and saying (and I quote): "No team could overcome 5 turnovers and win!"
And this has been yet another entry in "the Lions make Jerry look stupid" category.
I'm currently reading "Boys will be Boys" and believe me Jerry doesn't need a lot of help. He's just a good ol shit kicker who literally struck gold leasing dry holes and having them hit. He bought the team, Texas Stadium and all the debt for under 200m, they are worth at last valuation10.32b. He's a hell of a fool.
 

Confucius

There is no try, Just do
Feb 8, 2009
23,348
7,921
Toronto
Hmmm strange thing that, especially when I'm sure in the last few days that someone was saying how desperately they needed the new captain back. I think we've looked just as good with the actual captain in the line-up!

All I know is that right now there's a rocking chair at the Shady Acres Rest Home that an old orange tabby is sleeping in who's dreaming about its owner coming back someday. Not too soon we hope🫠
I expressed at the time it was a classless thing for the team to do.
 
  • Like
Reactions: therealkoho

Tak7

Registered User
Nov 1, 2009
13,344
5,233
GTA or the UK
Freeze this at the moment he tips the puck. It’s clearly below the cross bar.


I did - his glove and stick look higher than the goalie's head, which seems just under the crossbar.
So it's fine margins. Again, not nearly enough to overturn a no-goal call.
By letter of the law, that's the right call.
 

notDatsyuk

Registered User
Jul 20, 2018
11,500
9,519
If the league wants more offense, then all 3 reviews should've been good goals

-Woll wasn't stopping the puck whether he got love tapped or not
-Lorentz had a natural reaction to the puck hitting his knee. The whole "propelling" rule is really dumb
-Knies' stick was 50/50 at best. Call it a goal
The whole 'propelling' rule is really dumb until someone swats the puck out of midair with their hand into the Leafs net.

50/50 means the call on the ice stands.

The Washington call was the iffiest of the three.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1specter
Oct 15, 2014
12,547
12,006
The Duke's Archives
The whole 'propelling' rule is really dumb until someone swats the puck out of midair with their hand into the Leafs net.

50/50 means the call on the ice stands.

The Washington call was the iffiest of the three.

So a slight hop by Lorentz means he propelled it into the net? Makes no sense

And call it a goal on the ice then. Linesmen have been told to let close plays go at the blue line and then potentially deal with reviews, rather than calling offside. Why can't refs do that with high sticks when it's not blatant?

All 3 were bad calls either way.
 

Leafsfan74

Registered User
Jul 2, 2018
5,287
5,628
canada needs a big beautiful wall, and usa can pay for it

:sarcasm:
bubbles.gif
 

notDatsyuk

Registered User
Jul 20, 2018
11,500
9,519
So a slight hop by Lorentz means he propelled it into the net? Makes no sense

And call it a goal on the ice then. Linesmen have been told to let close plays go at the blue line and then potentially deal with reviews, rather than calling offside. Why can't refs do that with high sticks when it's not blatant?

All 3 were bad calls either way.
You may excuse it as 'a slight hop' if you want, but he clearly moved his leg forward which pushed the puck into the net, which is clearly against the rules.

Why call it a goal on the ice when you think it wasn't? Either way you can review it. A linesman allowing play to continue is nothing close to calling a goal/nongoal.

The Washington call was the closest of the three - none were 'bad'.
 

GrizzLeaf

Registered Bear
Aug 13, 2010
4,368
1,002
Quebec
Great comeback win. I'll take it!!

My problem with reviews is the inconsistency. That kicking goal is sometimes called good, sometimes called no goal. We've seen worse leg movements to redirect the puck that has been allowed after video review.

The high stick one was worse. How does a pro league in this day and age not have a camera set up at perfect crossbar height? The technology exists to get it right. Frikken spend the money and use it ffs.

How does a skewed camera angle supposed to help anyone get the call right? Imagine game 7 of a playoff round and the highstick is a hair over or under the crossbar. No ref will ever be able to know for sure.

Enough whining...

Onto the next one

Go Leafs Go!!!
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad