Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

The 2011-2012 NHL Season Thread

I have a rules question for everyone-

I was watching the stars yotes game. Stars player touches puck with high stick, puck bonces and Steve Ott scores. Goal is waved off because of the high stick. They review and come back and say its not reviewable because of the high touch. I will mention that the whistle for the high touch was not originally called and as far as i could tell from replays, the ref wasn't trying to blow a whistle.

Here is my question-
Why was this waved off? Ott shot it from the ice after the failed deflection.

It seems like they were trying to retroactively call a high touch. While I agree it should have been called you can't go back and do it. It would be no different if a dman was dragging a puck near the blueline and it poped over the line, he shot it and scored and they called it back because it was off-side.
 
cuestakid said:
I have a rules question for everyone-

I was watching the stars yotes game. Stars player touches puck with high stick, puck bonces and Steve Ott scores. Goal is waved off because of the high stick. They review and come back and say its not reviewable because of the high touch. I will mention that the whistle for the high touch was not originally called and as far as i could tell from replays, the ref wasn't trying to blow a whistle.

Here is my question-
Why was this waved off? Ott shot it from the ice after the failed deflection.

It seems like they were trying to retroactively call a high touch. While I agree it should have been called you can't go back and do it. It would be no different if a dman was dragging a puck near the blueline and it poped over the line, he shot it and scored and they called it back because it was off-side.
Click to expand...

What caused them to review the goal? Was it the high stick, or something else (not sure if it crossed the goal line, kicked in, etc)? And what kind of timeframe are we talking about here? Was it just 2 or 3 seconds between the high stick and goal (perhaps the ref didn't get a chance to blow the whistle before it went in) or was it a longer play?

Trying to find video of it but can't.
 
yg17 said:
What caused them to review the goal? Was it the high stick, or something else (not sure if it crossed the goal line, kicked in, etc)? And what kind of timeframe are we talking about here? Was it just 2 or 3 seconds between the high stick and goal (perhaps the ref didn't get a chance to blow the whistle before it went in) or was it a longer play?

Trying to find video of it but can't.
Click to expand...

what caused the review i have no idea (thus my question).They even said after they looked at it that the play isnt reviewable and that it was touched by a high stick. Time frame was roughly 5-7 seconds (player touched it, puck bounced to ott stick, ott shoots and scores).

Again-I didnt notice the whistle so i cant speak to "intent to blow", so I am hoping that once replays show up, we will see some intent which will at least make some sense.

EDIT-see bolded part below
80.1 High-sticking the Puck – Batting the puck above the normal height of the shoulders with a stick is prohibited. When a puck is struck with a high stick and subsequently comes into the possession and control of a player from the offending team (including the player who made contact with the puck), either directly or deflected off any player or official,there shall be a whistle.
When a puck has been contacted by a high stick, the play shall be permitted to continue, provided that:
(i) the puck has been batted to an opponent (when a player bats the puck to an opponent, the Referee shall give the “washout” signal immediately. Otherwise, he will stop the play).
(ii) a player of the defending side shall bat the puck into his own goal in which case the goal shall be allowed.
Cradling the puck on the blade of the stick (like lacrosse) above the normal height of the shoulders shall be prohibited and a stoppage of play shall result. If this is done by a player on a penalty shot or shootout attempt, the shot shall be stopped immediately and considered complete.

This is my theory-the ref thought that the deflection hit a coyote and then went to ott but called no goal and wanted to check it but once he realized it did not touch a coyote the play should have been whistled dead
 
Last edited:
cuestakid said:
what caused the review i have no idea (thus my question).They even said after they looked at it that the play isnt reviewable and that it was touched by a high stick. Time frame was roughly 5-7 seconds (player touched it, puck bounced to ott stick, ott shoots and scores).

Again-I didnt notice the whistle so i cant speak to "intent to blow", so I am hoping that once replays show up, we will see some intent which will at least make some sense.
Click to expand...

If there was no other obvious reason for reviewing it, my guess is the ref saw the high stick but wasn't completely sure about it and wanted to review it, and in that case, I think that's acceptable.
 
48504062-8a12-5273.jpg


Went to see the Islanders with my wife and friend from England. I got some great seats, but again, crappy iPhone. When I saw other people with SLRs, I kind of felt mad.

Islanders played well, gave up soft goals though, but was a fun experience. My friend really appreciated the ice girls and my wife loved watching people getting checked into the boards!
 
The refs in the Blues/Hawks game are ****ing worthless. How do you call goalie interference on someone who is pushed into the net by a player on the other team? Christ....
 
And with that win, that makes 23 straight wins at home. I actually missed most of the game due to forgetting about the early start. I'll have to wait for the highlights.
 
cuestakid said:
Surely-

thoughts on Nash?
Click to expand...

He's an amazing player stuck on a team with an AHL roster so his numbers don't reflect his abilities. On the right team, he's a consistent 40 plus goal scorer.

Burke and Howson (Columbus' GM) met today in New York to discuss Nash. I hope we land him.
 
Surely said:
He's an amazing player stuck on a team with an AHL roster so his numbers don't reflect his abilities. On the right team, he's a consistent 40 plus goal scorer.

Burke and Howson (Columbus' GM) met today in New York to discuss Nash. I hope we land him.
Click to expand...

But if the price Howson is asking (picks, prospects and top 2 line player) true, I dont think the Leafs or really anyone can pay it.
 
cuestakid said:
But if the price Howson is asking (picks, prospects and top 2 line player) true, I dont think the Leafs or really anyone can pay it.
Click to expand...

That's probably true. However, Howson isn't a very good GM, so anything can happen.

One good thing about Nash's situation is that he's already locked up in a contract for another 6 years (I think 6), so teams wouldn't have to worry about giving assets up and then losing him to free agency.

robo said:
Hey Lee my boyz are in desperate need of a goaltending;) You down?:cool:

Peace
Click to expand...

Goaltending issues in Philly? How strange!:eek:;)

leekohler said:
Sure! I'd rather play, and I don't use FaceBook. ;)
Click to expand...

Ha :D
 
leekohler said:
Oh, now stop! Noticed our Bruins fans are silent tonight. ;)
Click to expand...

Sorry some of us have lives and jobs and can't sit and post on macrumors all day.


Chara looks hurt. He has been awful for the past 2 weeks. When he's bad, the Bruins defense is bad. Since the team is built on the defense, when the defense is bad, the whole team is bad.

The Bergeron line has been getting chances but haven't been able to convert, and the rest of the lines have been a cluster**** without Horton and Peverley. David Krejci has been invisible ever since Horton got hurt, leaving us only Bergeron, Seguin, Lucic, and Marchand as forwards who have scoring skill. We are in desperate need for a 2nd line RW. Chiarelli and Julien got a week to figure this out.
 
Lee it was a gorgeous day here today. I caught the first period and the bruins looked really good.no idea what happened there after.
There seems to be some changes going on with there game.
To me they are trying to play western conference hockey more so than eastern.

I don't mind the way they are playing. They are trying new things, new players and new ideas. Chara's game is off. It looks like he is over thinking plays, possibly new plays and it's costing them.

Thomas and Tuuka seem to be slumping too.

We will see if the bruins turn things around and go back to the way they played after game 13.
With Philly murdering another star goalie. the Rangers wil runaway with 1st.
 
leekohler said:
So do the rest if us. I'm sorry you have to work on Sunday.
Click to expand...

Me too. Such is life in the restaurant business when I have classes during the week. Monday is my only day off.


bruinsrme said:
Lee it was a gorgeous day here today. I caught the first period and the bruins looked really good.no idea what happened there after.
There seems to be some changes going on with there game.
To me they are trying to play western conference hockey more so than eastern.
Click to expand...

I caught part of the 2nd period when the 2 goals were scored. The first goal was horrible defense (none at all) by Chara and Ference. Ference was trying to change out for Boychuk and they screwed up. I forget the 2nd goal, I was falling asleep at that point.

I don't mind the way they are playing. They are trying new things, new players and new ideas. Chara's game is off. It looks like he is over thinking plays, possibly new plays and it's costing them.
Click to expand...

At some points it looks like they are afraid to hit.

Thomas and Tuuka seem to be slumping too.
Click to expand...

They are both slumping, but I don't think it's coincidence that this is happening at the same time as our defense has been playing horrible.

We will see if the bruins turn things around and go back to the way they played after game 13.
With Philly murdering another star goalie. the Rangers wil runaway with 1st.
Click to expand...

When the Bruins were running train on the league earlier this season, they had two strengths: defense and the ability to roll four lines. These worked hand-in-hand.

The defense has been crap. Lines 2 and 3 have been invisible, and the constant rotation of players in and out without Horton and Peverley has killed this team's ability to roll four lines. Marchand-Bergeron-Seguin (line 1) has been good, but the rest haven't. I'm going to maintain that Julien needs to break up that line to give him some more balance. Marchand-Bergeron-Pouliot, Lucic-Krejci-Seguin would be nice to see for a couple of games.
 
Last edited:
yg17 said:
The refs in the Blues/Hawks game are ****ing worthless. How do you call goalie interference on someone who is pushed into the net by a player on the other team? Christ....
Click to expand...


The refs have been calling this for the last few days without fail. There were 4 in the Bs/Habs game the other night (2 each). Even 2 on the same play. More today. I think the pendulum has swung to the other side - and too far.

pivo6 said:
Yay!

Backstrom is currently having a great game. How it's still 2-0 I don't know.
Click to expand...

He was great. Don't be mislead by the number of Bruins shots though. Most were from the point with no one around to fish the rebound. I think I mentioned this a few posts back.

leekohler said:
Oh, now stop! Noticed our Bruins fans are silent tonight. ;)
Click to expand...

I'm not afraid to face the music - I was just skiing.

What Zioxide said is true I just didn't have the energy to cut it up. One thing though - Krejci isn't invisible. He's a boat anchor right now. Minus-8
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back