Stanley Cup Final: Pittsburgh Penguins vs Nashville Predators

[ericdaoust]

It's tough for Rinne but at the same time Murray had plenty of scoring chances that didn't turn into goals. He definitely won the goalie duel and that's a big deal when the game is close.

[rataylor22]

well, you ignored the link (source) so here's another: To have one's name engraved on the Stanley Cup certain requirements must be met. A player must have at least 41 games played with the club or one game played in the Stanley Cup Finals. However, in 1994 a stipulation was added to allow a team to petition the Commissioner for permission to have players' names put on the Cup if extenuating circumstances prevented them from being available to play

http://www.webcitation.org/5mq4TUogx...fun_facts.html
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stanle...e_inscriptions


Interesting Raanta isn't on the 14/15 Cup - 14 games, 7 wins during the reg. season, but Chi never submitted his name for engraving http://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/nhl/a...llo-nordstrom/

Its amazing what you can find when you research for 2 min vs. just stating an opinion

So teams can choose which players go on the cup? Yes? Thanks, good to know the answer is EXACTLY WHAT I SAID.

[lucafen4]

So teams can choose which players go on the cup? Yes? Thanks, good to know the answer is EXACTLY WHAT I SAID.

No... they can't submit a list and have it just accepted. If they qualify they go on, otherwise, they must PETITION to get a player engraved. That's a request to the league. Not a simple choice. It is not exactly what you said.

Humour me, find where it says teams CHOOSE the players to be engraved in the quote.

"in 1994 a stipulation was added to allow a team to petition the Commissioner for permission to have players' names put on the Cup if extenuating circumstances prevented them from being available to play"

I bolded the key words in case you can't read posts of this length

[rataylor22]

No... they can't submit a list and have it just accepted. If they qualify they go on, otherwise, they must PETITION to get a player engraved. That's a request to the league. Not a simple choice. It is not exactly what you said.

Humour me, find where it says teams CHOOSE the players to be engraved in the quote.

"in 1994 a stipulation was added to allow a team to petition the Commissioner for permission to have players' names put on the Cup if extenuating circumstances prevented them from being available to play"

I bolded the key words in case you can't read posts of this length

It's never denied, so petition is a lawyer term, not an in practice term. If a team wants a name on the cup that technically doesn't meet the requirements, they already have a good enough reason. Never denied. Ergo, team choosing.

Just like Ribiero will probably NOT have his name on the cup, as that is also a team choice.

[lucafen4]

It's never denied, so petition is a lawyer term, not an in practice term. If a team wants a name on the cup that technically doesn't meet the requirements, they already have a good enough reason. Never denied. Ergo, team choosing.

Just like Ribiero will probably NOT have his name on the cup, as that is also a team choice.

Sigh... I won't beat a dead horse. I'll say it again. I'd rather converse with Iron Ev. ... you're stubbornness is astounding sometimes.

[Loch]

Gary Bettman said the Offside/GI challenge has worked out how they expected....

The league is happy because for too long they have lacked direct control over the outcome of games. There comes a time when you grow tired of just rigging draft lotteries and playoff match-ups and you want to go for the big brass ring that is the cup finals.

[Godin]

Trying to be unbiased, so I won't comment on much, but the goals called back on plays that were 45 seconds prior are a little ridiculous.

Also ironically enough that third goal reminded me of another goalie in the Stanley cup finals and his infamous WJC finals appearance.

I think that any review of an offside is ridiculous. Yeah, I know, an offside is an offside but, there is no advantage to being a hair offside. How many penalties could have been called leading up to that goal?? I'm sure it's more than 1. A penalty is also a penalty isn't it? Can you imagine how many goals would have been called back during the history of the NHL? Let the linesman call it. Offsides are their chance to shine. That's basically what they get paid to call, or just get rid of linesman all together. Just rambling.

Here is an explanation of a linesman's responsibilities:

"Linesmen (also known as the "Liney") are primarily responsible for watching for violations involving the centre line and the blue line. Such infractions include icing and offside infractions, after which the linesmen conduct faceoffs. They are also expected to break up scuffles, fistfights and other altercations that occur during the game. Ice hockey rules allow linesmen to call some penalties (such as too many players on the ice), while others only allow them to report the infraction to the referee."

Let their call be final. I think it undermines their job.

[rataylor22]

I think that any review of an offside is ridiculous. Yeah, I know, an offside is an offside but, there is no advantage to being a hair offside. How many penalties could have been called leading up to that goal?? I'm sure it's more than 1. A penalty is also a penalty isn't it? Can you imagine how many goals would have been called back during the history of the NHL? Let the linesman call it. Offsides are their chance to shine. That's basically what they get paid to call, or just get rid of linesman all together. Just rambling.

Here is an explanation of a linesman's responsibilities:

"Linesmen (also known as the "Liney") are primarily responsible for watching for violations involving the centre line and the blue line. Such infractions include icing and offside infractions, after which the linesmen conduct faceoffs. They are also expected to break up scuffles, fistfights and other altercations that occur during the game. Ice hockey rules allow linesmen to call some penalties (such as too many players on the ice), while others only allow them to report the infraction to the referee."

Let their call be final. I think it undermines their job.

Refs are paid to call penalties and they don't. Hell refs are called to paid goals and we need review to make sure those aren't missed sometimes. Should we get rid of reviews of goals that hit the back of the crossbar and pop out and the ref doesn't call it? Or ones that just barely cross the line and the ref doesn't call it?

The refs and linesman undermine themselves by being bad.

[Jouko-Pouko]

At the very least they should add a time limit to come up with a conclusion. If it's not decisive after 2 minutes the call on the ice stands.

For offside reviews, I'd give them 20 seconds max to review the play. If it's not clearly offside, then get on with the game. Long reviews are the worst, no matter the outcome.

[lucafen4]

For offside reviews, I'd give them 20 seconds max to review the play. If it's not clearly offside, then get on with the game. Long reviews are the worst, no matter the outcome.

can't we just use technology? put laser sensors along the blue line, a sensor in the puck and in the front/back of every players skate - let computers determine when the skate is off the ice or not a and have an electronic whistle for any off side that is less than 12 inches.

[ericdaoust]

can't we just use technology? put laser sensors along the blue line, a sensor in the puck and in the front/back of every players skate - let computers determine when the skate is off the ice or not a and have an electronic whistle for any off side that is less than 12 inches.

[PenguinHunter]

It's never denied, so petition is a lawyer term, not an in practice term. If a team wants a name on the cup that technically doesn't meet the requirements, they already have a good enough reason. Never denied. Ergo, team choosing.

Just like Ribiero will probably NOT have his name on the cup, as that is also a team choice.

Its never denied? Interesting. I would love to see proof of it never being denied.

[lucafen4]

Its never denied? Interesting. I would love to see proof of it never being denied.

There's this:

When the Edmonton Oilers won their first championship in 1984, owner Peter Pocklington included his father's name - "Basil Pocklington" - among the names engraved. It was later scratched out with a series Xs.

- - - Updated - - -

There's also the fact that teams are well aware of the rules - so they don't make unreasonable requests that they know will be rejected -which would seem... logical

[Mr. Guru]

I believe Pocklington had his fathers name engraved on the cup during one of the Oilers wins in the 80s.

They covered up the engraving by engraving a whole bunch of x's over his name years later.

You can't just put anyone's name on the cup.

[Jouko-Pouko]

Based on tenure, and the fact it's probably their last game with Pittsburgh, I would imagine the first 5 to touch the cup are in some order Fleury, Kunitz, Cullen, and Hainsey. I don't think it will be Hainsey because he's only been there since the trade deadline.

I could see Sid -> Kunitz -> Fleury -> Cullen -> Hainsey

On Nashville, I don't even think there's another option other than Rinne. Fisher is the other obvious one but he's the captain. Unless the fully embrace troll and give it to Subban, I can't see it being anyone else. Maybe RyJo if they can get him on skates.

Kunitz would be my guess if he retires now after winning another Cup. Otherwise, probably Fleury since he's leaving the team.