Post-Game Talk: Lucifer

3 stars


  • Total voters
    127
Status
Not open for further replies.
Did everyone enjoy that? Good, I have something to say.

I think we've all watched enough hockey and paid enough emotional tax to this team to be qualified to say somebody sucks. I don't care about that.

I don't even care if you think a guy is soft and I don't even care if you like a guy's hair.

That being said, the personal attacks on a guy who plays for this team are seriously disturbing.

"Zibanejad is soy. Zibanejad is a virgin. He's not a man. No testosterone."

You want personal attacks? Here's one:

Who the f*** are you? You're a high school third liner sitting on a message board. If you're not on Viagra, you will be within ten years and you get winded going to the mailbox.

"HE NEEDZ TO EAT SUM MEAT"

Most of you can't eat meat without burping, almost throwing up, and going "whoa boy..."

If you're reading this, you're probably overweight, bad at sports, have heartburn, and watching the Rangers is your exercise. That's true for me too but I'm willing to admit it.

Jesus Christ. The guy gets made fun of for being a father. Being a father is more important than this silly game.

Hell, saying something a little off-color about an opponent during a game, I can understand. He plays for the Rangers. Maybe leave it to on-ice criticisms.

This isn't a mod warning because making fun of a guy for having hobbies and a f***ing CHILD at home isn't against the rules. It's just what I think of some of you and I want you to know.
No one gives a shit what I think but I’ve been thinking this exact thing lately about how people have been talking about him. It’s gone beyond “normal” frustration and ribbing of a player who’s struggling. It’s pretty gross
 
I'm at work so I have only been able to go to my office glance at the game now and again - now that I have a minute to re-watch, am I crazy or did the whistle blow before Hughes' goal crossed the goal line? I know it doesn't affect the outcome - just curious.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RangerLifer
1700364609926622.jpg
 
I'm at work so I have only been able to go to my office glance at the game now and again - now that I have a minute to re-watch, am I crazy or did the whistle blow before Hughes' goal crossed the goal line? I know it doesn't affect the outcome - just curious.
They ruled the following:

Continuous Play rule (Rule 37), which states that a goal may be awarded, even after a whistle is blown, "if the puck entered the net as the culmination of a continuous play, where the result of the original shot was unaffected by any whistle blown."
 
anyone think say that maybe Pitlick is the reason that the 4th line has actually gone from horrid to not bad?
Think it’s more moving Bonino off that line up to the 3rd. Bonino is great on faceoffs and ok on the pk, due to his shot blocking. However, at this point in his career he can’t skate or complete a pass, so just kills a line at 5 on 5.

4th line is solid now even when not scoring and would keep them together when Chytil comes back.
 
I'm at work so I have only been able to go to my office glance at the game now and again - now that I have a minute to re-watch, am I crazy or did the whistle blow before Hughes' goal crossed the goal line? I know it doesn't affect the outcome - just curious.
Yes it blew but they're saying that the puck was on its way in. It wasn't a lost sight of the puck situation. Shesty didn't have control
 
I’m not worried about Mika. He’ll break thru he’s getting shots hitting posts.

Kakko is not generating ANYTHING no chances. Nothing.
Best (worst) was on the power play. He was on the left wall demanding the puck from Miller. He gets the puck and gives it right back to Miller thinking Miller will give it right back like a game of catch. First of all your unit got on with 40 seconds left on the advantage. Second, there was room to make a play.
 
  • Like
Reactions: egelband
They ruled the following:

Continuous Play rule (Rule 37), which states that a goal may be awarded, even after a whistle is blown, "if the puck entered the net as the culmination of a continuous play, where the result of the original shot was unaffected by any whistle blown."
Interesting. That answers my question if a Rangers in position to swipe that puck but didn't because of the whistle. In that case there's no goal because the whistle affected something. At least that's how I read that rule
 
Annoyed that Panarin is trailing a game behind Nylander's streak, but blow is softened knowing that Will has the Leafs by the balls this summer.

Excited that 17 gets him tied for 8th all time with Andreychuk, Zetterberg, and McDavid.

Just f***ing amused by the fact that he's probably not taking Wayne's #1 with 51 games in 83-84 :laugh:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad