London Knights 2022-23 Season Thread (Part 5)

[OMG67]

I agree with you right up to the point of the check, the reciever should not be cleared of all responsibility, he can't be expecting to rush the puck and not be hit. And if you know you are going to get hit be sure you see hit coming, if you put your head down half a second before impact how is the player supposed to stop his momentum in that short time. I don't buy the player putting his head down and he's washed of all responsibilty, this is junior hockey, contact is involved, better learn to keep the head high or it'll hurt bad. What I don't like to see is players using hits on vulnerables, trying to drive players through boards or purposely trying to enjure opponents, I thought this McCue hit fitted that category of excessive hitting or charging. But if the recipient got hurt for lowing his head shortly before impact that is or it should be on him, players must make sure they see players coming if they are going to carry the puck. It should be part of their daily instruction and practice, it should be a must at this level. IMHO

The hitter is the responsible player to ensure the hit is clean. Intention is no longer a factor, at all. Your opinion of who is responsible and when/how is now irrelevant. Players turn their backs along the walls and get pasted all the time and draw penalties. It is now the way it is called. Be consistent. COmplaining about the rules is a different discussion.

This isn’t a situation where I disagree in theory with what you are saying. Personally, IMO, athletes are meat and essentially gladiators and perform at our pleasure. But, that isn’t a popular opinion anymore AND the rules are not designed with that in mind. The rules are designed with player safety being the PRIMARY focus, especially at the junior level.

If we are going to go in that direction, there should be consistency on how it is handled. In many cases the officials have by default called major penalties if there were any possibility of there being some sort of dangerous hit/play and then let the video replay reduce the penalty after review.

In this case, the play was more than close enough to review. Anyone that suggests that was not contact with the head is delusional. There is no way to conclusively determine that wans’t a hit to the head based on the two replays we saw on the broadcast. They were more than close enough to go to video. They chose, for some reason, to simply discuss it as a group and didn’t bother to take a second look at it. To me that is arrogant when a player leaves the ice supported by the trainer and another player from a heavy collision. Hits like that should be review ALL THE TIME. We have video review. Use it. If it is determined that the call ont he ice stands, then great. All good. I’m not even saying it is for sure a hit to the head. But, it should be reviewed and a second look would have done zero harm.

 

[Fastpace]

After watching Sarnia today eke out an OT win , I wondered if I was watching a lacrosse game ,so much cross-checking no penalty on the Guelph squad. Ross and Cairns would have a hard time doing a midget game . Ross didn't even start the game on the ice

They are part of the game, got to play throught it and not be bothered by them, the sooner teams puts them behind the quicker they can concentrate to the games.

And I'll let you in on a little secret, 60% of OHL refs hold residency in the Guelph area, that is also where they are having their fall training camps. Best not expect favoritism from them when they are officiating your favorite team, the refs are trying their very best not to be bias but they are amateurs still and they are also very human, they have family and friends to answer to when they go home. Like junior players not all will turn pros. Like all players, the better they do their work the better chance they'll have to move up too. IMHO

 

[Otto]

All this yapping back and forth about a clean hit...

 

[Fastpace]

The hitter is the responsible player to ensure the hit is clean. Intention is no longer a factor, at all. Your opinion of who is responsible and when/how is now irrelevant. Players turn their backs along the walls and get pasted all the time and draw penalties. It is now the way it is called. Be consistent. COmplaining about the rules is a different discussion.

This isn’t a situation where I disagree in theory with what you are saying. Personally, IMO, athletes are meat and essentially gladiators and perform at our pleasure. But, that isn’t a popular opinion anymore AND the rules are not designed with that in mind. The rules are designed with player safety being the PRIMARY focus, especially at the junior level.

If we are going to go in that direction, there should be consistency on how it is handled. In many cases the officials have by default called major penalties if there were any possibility of there being some sort of dangerous hit/play and then let the video replay reduce the penalty after review.

In this case, the play was more than close enough to review. Anyone that suggests that was not contact with the head is delusional. There is no way to conclusively determine that wans’t a hit to the head based on the two replays we saw on the broadcast. They were more than close enough to go to video. They chose, for some reason, to simply discuss it as a group and didn’t bother to take a second look at it. To me that is arrogant when a player leaves the ice supported by the trainer and another player from a heavy collision. Hits like that should be review ALL THE TIME. We have video review. Use it. If it is determined that the call ont he ice stands, then great. All good. I’m not even saying it is for sure a hit to the head. But, it should be reviewed and a second look would have done zero harm.

I respect your opinion, and I also completely disagree

It's not by replaying plays they will change this game. But they will with game technics of how it is played. Letting players playing the game with their heads down on the same ice surface where body contact are allowed, if there is a need to review a contact by that time it's already too late the dammage is done. Teaching players playing contact hockey the technic of dishing out and receiving contacts along with what is and is not allowed will prevent long before any reviewing of plays is ever needed. Either they remove all contacts or they teach all the players the proper ways to play with it. Are the players going to play in a House League or in a Pro League when they leave juniors level hockey.

 

[OMG67]

I respect your opinion, and I also completely disagree

It's not by replaying plays they will change this game. But they will with game technics of how it is played. Letting players playing the game with their heads down on the same ice surface where body contact are allowed, if there is a need to review a contact by that time it's already too late the dammage is done. Teaching players playing contact hockey the technic of dishing out and receiving contacts along with what is and is not allowed will prevent long before any reviewing of plays is ever needed. Either they remove all contacts or they teach all the players the proper ways to play with it. Are the players going to play in a House League or in a Pro League when they leave juniors level hockey.

I think we are talking about two different conversations.

What I am saying is in a league that has heavily relied on replays by the officials to ensure they get injury type play penalty calls accurate, there was no reason not to go to the replay. I am calling for consistency for use of video technology, not selective.

I am not even saying I know that was a head shot. It could very well have been a clean hit. It looks fishy and too close not to go to replay.

What you are taking about is a kid should not look down at a puck behind the net after the goalie redirects it. He should keep his head up and not look for the puck to retrieve and risk overstating the puck because, well, keep your head up. You never know what’s coming and you need to be prepared for that because of being ready for the NHL that has a rule not to hit players blindside.

That hit was predatory from the perspective that the player didn’t have a chance to see it coming. I’m not calling McCue a predator, jsut the play itself is predatory.

The League has mandated, even at the NHL level, the player making the hit is the one responsible for the outcome, not the irresponsible player that got hit. I f’n HATE the guys the turn their back along the side boards and take a hit from behind. It isn’t the hitting players fault they committed to a hit and the player changed direction BUT, that is the way they call it. So, in light of that, all I am saying is there should be consistency. Not going to replay was simply arrogance. The four of them got together and discussed how right they were and no Need to go to replay. To me, that is the problem. With a proper replay angle or multiple replay angles, the play could have been properly reviewed and the correct call could have been made but they did not do it.

You can teach players to be aware but there are situations where players can’t be aware. The OS player needed to look down to retrieve the puck or risk overstating it. He looked down and by the time he looked up it was collision time. We are talking about maybe 4-5 feet of ice between touching the puck and the hit. It really wasn’t enough time.

 

[KnightWatch]

Watched the Gaz penalty and the McCue hit several times in slow-mo, and personally I feel like the refs got it wrong in both situations, so I guess it all evened out in the end.

Bottom line, the Knights out-played the Attack for most of the game, and Votary was the only reason it even went to OT.

 

[Fastpace]

I think we are talking about two different conversations.

What I am saying is in a league that has heavily relied on replays by the officials to ensure they get injury type play penalty calls accurate, there was no reason not to go to the replay. I am calling for consistency for use of video technology, not selective.

I am not even saying I know that was a head shot. It could very well have been a clean hit. It looks fishy and too close not to go to replay.

What you are taking about is a kid should not look down at a puck behind the net after the goalie redirects it. He should keep his head up and not look for the puck to retrieve and risk overstating the puck because, well, keep your head up. You never know what’s coming and you need to be prepared for that because of being ready for the NHL that has a rule not to hit players blindside.

That hit was predatory from the perspective that the player didn’t have a chance to see it coming. I’m not calling McCue a predator, jsut the play itself is predatory.

The League has mandated, even at the NHL level, the player making the hit is the one responsible for the outcome, not the irresponsible player that got hit. I f’n HATE the guys the turn their back along the side boards and take a hit from behind. It isn’t the hitting players fault they committed to a hit and the player changed direction BUT, that is the way they call it. So, in light of that, all I am saying is there should be consistency. Not going to replay was simply arrogance. The four of them got together and discussed how right they were and no Need to go to replay. To me, that is the problem. With a proper replay angle or multiple replay angles, the play could have been properly reviewed and the correct call could have been made but they did not do it.

You can teach players to be aware but there are situations where players can’t be aware. The OS player needed to look down to retrieve the puck or risk overstating it. He looked down and by the time he looked up it was collision time. We are talking about maybe 4-5 feet of ice between touching the puck and the hit. It really wasn’t enough time.

Again my dear friend, there were no head contact at all as McCue went for the chest and that is where it should end. And if it was as you are aledging a head shot, Sedley should not have put his head down half a second before contact as he was carrying the puck. A hit is use to separate the puck carrier from the puck, now was McCue's play overly aggressive and should he have deserved a penalty, yes, was it directed to the head, no, regardless of the consequence by the hit or final result of it, his hit was directed solely to the chest..

Thank You for all your replies OMG67, I am now done with this discussion and moving on. Cheers!

 

[OMG67]

Watched the Gaz penalty and the McCue hit several times in slow-mo, and personally I feel like the refs got it wrong in both situations, so I guess it all evened out in the end.

Bottom line, the Knights out-played the Attack for most of the game, and Votary was the only reason it even went to OT.

I didn’t see the Gaz penalty. I only caught OT. Can’t speak about that one.

Again my dear friend, there were no head contact at all as McCue went for the chest and that is where it should end. And if it was as you are aledging a head shot, Sedley should not have put his head down half a second before contact as he was carrying the puck. A hit is use to separate the puck carrier from the puck, now was McCue's play overly aggressive and should he have deserved a penalty, yes, was it directed to the head, no, regardless of the consequence by the hit or final result of it, his hit was directed solely to the chest..

Thank You for all your replies OMG67, I am now done with this discussion and moving on. Cheers!

All good! I get what you are saying and respectfully thank you for the sensible discussion. I didn’t want to talk about whether the hit was or was not clean, jsut that the officials should have leaned on the replay technology and not doing so was arrogant.

 

[Londoner Knight]

I didn’t see the Gaz penalty. I only caught OT. Can’t speak about that one.



All good! I get what you are saying and respectfully thank you for the sensible discussion. I didn’t want to talk about whether the hit was or was not clean, jsut that the officials should have leaned on the replay technology and not doing so was arrogant.

Remember when Gilmour got high sticked by Gretzky in game 7 and we just dealt with it?....Christ...move on snowflakes, it's hockey...not table tennis. Next topic....anyone else pissed about paper straws?...I mean, now THERES an argument to drag on about!

 

[StormWatcher]

They are part of the game, got to play throught it and not be bothered by them, the sooner teams puts them behind the quicker they can concentrate to the games.

And I'll let you in on a little secret, 60% of OHL refs hold residency in the Guelph area, that is also where they are having their fall training camps. Best not expect favoritism from them when they are officiating your favorite team, the refs are trying their very best not to be bias but they are amateurs still and they are also very human, they have family and friends to answer to when they go home. Like junior players not all will turn pros. Like all players, the better they do their work the better chance they'll have to move up too. IMHO

Well there's a new conspiracy theory. Can't just be general incompetence...

 

[OMG67]

Remember when Gilmour got high sticked by Gretzky in game 7 and we just dealt with it?....Christ...move on snowflakes, it's hockey...not table tennis. Next topic....anyone else pissed about paper straws?...I mean, now THERES an argument to drag on about!

It is a discussion forum. Part of the game are plays like this. If it is ok with you, I’d like to have the freedom to discuss the game. One particular poster engaged and we had a conversation. If that annoys you, too bad. You are welcome to click IGNORE in my profile. Or, you are free to engage in the conversation. But, to essentially call me a snowflake for having a discussion about whether or not a video replay should have occurred is offside. I’ve done absolutely nothing to justify being personally insulted.

 

[Slowpace]

Watched the Gaz penalty and the McCue hit several times in slow-mo, and personally I feel like the refs got it wrong in both situations, so I guess it all evened out in the end.

Bottom line, the Knights out-played the Attack for most of the game, and Votary was the only reason it even went to OT.

Agree with you, however, the Gaz "penalty" in OT could have cost us the game, and wouldn't be reviewable by the league. McCue's hit will be reviewed.
Unfortunately, the caliber of officiating in this league is at a lower level than the caliber of play and coaching.

 

[Londoner Knight]

It is a discussion forum. Part of the game are plays like this. If it is ok with you, I’d like to have the freedom to discuss the game. One particular poster engaged and we had a conversation. If that annoys you, too bad. You are welcome to click IGNORE in my profile. Or, you are free to engage in the conversation. But, to essentially call me a snowflake for having a discussion about whether or not a video replay should have occurred is offside. I’ve done absolutely nothing to justify being personally insulted.

Let it snow!...for discussion of course. Anyway, back to paper straws......

 

[Londoner Knight]

 

[OMG67]

Let it snow!...for discussion of course. Anyway, back to paper straws......

You are a fine gentleman. Good chat. Be well.

 

[zman77]

George Diaco's patience was perfect in the 0-Zone.
His shot was a quick flick of the wrists.
Winnnnneeerrr!!

 

[zman77]

Gazizov's Penalty.

 

[TheOrangePylon]

I think we are talking about two different conversations.

What I am saying is in a league that has heavily relied on replays by the officials to ensure they get injury type play penalty calls accurate, there was no reason not to go to the replay. I am calling for consistency for use of video technology, not selective.

I am not even saying I know that was a head shot. It could very well have been a clean hit. It looks fishy and too close not to go to replay.

What you are taking about is a kid should not look down at a puck behind the net after the goalie redirects it. He should keep his head up and not look for the puck to retrieve and risk overstating the puck because, well, keep your head up. You never know what’s coming and you need to be prepared for that because of being ready for the NHL that has a rule not to hit players blindside.

That hit was predatory from the perspective that the player didn’t have a chance to see it coming. I’m not calling McCue a predator, jsut the play itself is predatory.

The League has mandated, even at the NHL level, the player making the hit is the one responsible for the outcome, not the irresponsible player that got hit. I f’n HATE the guys the turn their back along the side boards and take a hit from behind. It isn’t the hitting players fault they committed to a hit and the player changed direction BUT, that is the way they call it. So, in light of that, all I am saying is there should be consistency. Not going to replay was simply arrogance. The four of them got together and discussed how right they were and no Need to go to replay. To me, that is the problem. With a proper replay angle or multiple replay angles, the play could have been properly reviewed and the correct call could have been made but they did not do it.

You can teach players to be aware but there are situations where players can’t be aware. The OS player needed to look down to retrieve the puck or risk overstating it. He looked down and by the time he looked up it was collision time. We are talking about maybe 4-5 feet of ice between touching the puck and the hit. It really wasn’t enough time.

I am not getting on the argument of if it was or was not a penalty, but just a note on the replay talk. I do not believe they are able to video review a penalty play, unless a major penalty is called live on the ice. There was no call on the play, so they could not review it. Which is why they stood and talked for a few minutes, to determine between the 4 of them, what happened.

If they suddenly started reviewing every play, games would take 4.5 hours. Which would be terrible.
I am of the opinion there is too much replay right now, as is. It a human game, let the officials call the game how they see it and save the replays for glaringly obvious stuff missed.

 

[OMG67]

I am not getting on the argument of if it was or was not a penalty, but just a note on the replay talk. I do not believe they are able to video review a penalty play, unless a major penalty is called live on the ice. There was no call on the play, so they could not review it. Which is why they stood and talked for a few minutes, to determine between the 4 of them, what happened.

If they suddenly started reviewing every play, games would take 4.5 hours. Which would be terrible.
I am of the opinion there is too much replay right now, as is. It a human game, let the officials call the game how they see it and save the replays for glaringly obvious stuff missed.

Sorry brother. I’m only allowed to discuss paper straws. I hope you understand.

 

[Blairwitch58]

What about the Leonard hit? OS didn't like it. Gaz takes stupid penalties but the Overtime call was brutal. 5-5 London dominated...i think we split the two games on the road. 7 Dman is working out. Top two lines without Gaz is smart..playoff hockey requires grit. Gaz can still get his chances on second powerplay. If we win 3rd game do we start Bowen game 4? Cheers!

 

[TheOrangePylon]

What about the Leonard hit? OS didn't like it. Gaz takes stupid penalties but the Overtime call was brutal. 5-5 London dominated...i think we split the two games on the road. 7 Dman is working out. Top two lines without Gaz is smart..playoff hockey requires grit. Gaz can still get his chances on second powerplay. If we win 3rd game do we start Bowen game 4? Cheers!

I would say absolutely no on Bowen getting a start. The net is Brochu's unless he gives them a reason not to be in there.

 

[sbpointer]

What about the Leonard hit? OS didn't like it. Gaz takes stupid penalties but the Overtime call was brutal. 5-5 London dominated...i think we split the two games on the road. 7 Dman is working out. Top two lines without Gaz is smart..playoff hockey requires grit. Gaz can still get his chances on second powerplay. If we win 3rd game do we start Bowen game 4? Cheers!

Bowen's next start he will be the number 1 goalie whether it by age or injury..

Not a reflection on his ability more the history of this team and how they operate.

 

[Fastpace]

What about the Leonard hit? OS didn't like it. Gaz takes stupid penalties but the Overtime call was brutal. 5-5 London dominated...i think we split the two games on the road. 7 Dman is working out. Top two lines without Gaz is smart..playoff hockey requires grit. Gaz can still get his chances on second powerplay. If we win 3rd game do we start Bowen game 4? Cheers!

If Leonard is our seventh D, we are in a heck of a good shape, I have seen many defensemen playing top four minutes not as good as him. Leonard has been a real impactful team player for the Knights this season, there are absolutely nothing this guy wouldn't do for his teammates.

I strongly believe the refs were honest in their call on Gazizov, from the angles at each end of the ice they could not have seen what we saw from the middle angle of the rink. It's part of the game, "game on", it's so much easier for an old guy like me to accept these calls. In my days reviews were not part of the game and films were not as clear as they are today, we had to rely on human eyes for those calls and then play on. I also think Gazizov is one, if not the one, of the most improved London player this year..

 

[Fastpace]

I would say absolutely no on Bowen getting a start. The net is Brochu's unless he gives them a reason not to be in there.

I agree, none of the four goals on him was his fault in game 2. Beside Brochu is in a zone right now best not mess with it. Bowen will get his chance when time comes.

 

[Blairwitch58]

If Leonard is our seventh D, we are in a heck of a good shape, I have seen many defensemen playing top four minutes not as good as him. Leonard has been a real impactful team player for the Knights this season, there are absolutely nothing this guy wouldn't do for his teammates.

I strongly believe the refs were honest in their call on Gazizov, from the angles at each end of the ice they could not have seen what we saw from the middle angle of the rink. It's part of the game, "game on", it's so much easier for an old guy like me to accept these calls. In my days reviews were not part of the game and films were not as clear as they are today, we had to rely on human eyes for those calls and then play on. I also think Gazizov is one, if not the one, of the most improved London player this year..

Agree on Gazizov being improved (most improved not) Cowan. Take the good with the bad with Gaz. One of the top passer on the team, on the PP has good eyes for setting up open guy. He's soft rarely wins any puck battles and all his penalties are slashes or trips after he gets beaten. Give Hunter credit for using him in the best situations.