View Poll Results: Stanley Cup Final: (A2) Boston Bruins vs. (C3) St. Louis Blues

Voters
42. This poll is closed
  • Bruins in 4

    0 0%
  • Bruins in 5

    2 4.76%
  • Bruins in 6

    13 30.95%
  • Bruins in 7

    3 7.14%
  • Blues in 4

    2 4.76%
  • Blues in 5

    1 2.38%
  • Blues in 6

    12 28.57%
  • Blues in 7

    9 21.43%
Page 8 of 13 FirstFirst ... 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 ... LastLast
Results 106 to 120 of 190

Thread: Stanley Cup Final: (A2) Boston Bruins vs. (C3) St. Louis Blues

  1. #106
    Location
    Ottawa
    Rep Power
    50

    The Great One

    Default Re: Stanley Cup Final: (A2) Boston Bruins vs. (C3) St. Louis Blues

    Quote Originally Posted by Rylant View Post
    Maybe not the major factor, but certainly a factor. And frankly, it shouldn’t be. What makes it worse, is that refs call everything in a pre season game, and nothing in a tight playoff game, and there is a sliding scale for everything in the middle. That makes it incredibly difficult for players to know what will be, and what won’t be a penalty.

    Take a look at the NFL. Every offensive lineman commits a “hold” on essentially every single play. However, the standard for what will be called “holding” and what won’t be, is very well defined. They all know where that line is. This way, most every holding infraction is called by this standard. In the NFL, a penalty isn’t called with varying degrees dependent on how important the game is, and how tight the score is. A “hold” is a “hold”, every time, regardless of whether or not it is in pre season or the Super Bowl.

    Embellishment is rarely called in the NHL. I would like to see it called more often. That would encourage people to not dive. I am also completely ok with a ref calling a tripping penalty and an embellishment penalty on the same play. The thought process being that the ref would have called the penalty in the first place. The player trying to sell it, didn’t need to and now they are being called for the theatrics.

    Rylant
    I'm not sure I'm buying what your selling re: consistency of holding penalties in the NFL. I agree that most of the really flagrant stuff does get called, but there is a huge variation in what gets called for marginal things, IMO.

    I'd also suggest you are comparing apples and oranges. You are comparing one kind of NHL penalty against every kind of NHL penalty. (How often are people on here complaining about a missed holding penalty in the NHL, or a missed hooking penalty?)

  2. #107
    Location
    Brampton, Ontario
    Rep Power
    40

    Dobber Sports Titan

    Default Re: Stanley Cup Final: (A2) Boston Bruins vs. (C3) St. Louis Blues

    Quote Originally Posted by als_revenge View Post
    I'd put Ken Dryden on this list. He won a Stanley Cup (and the Conn Smythe) before he was even eligible for Calder/rookie.
    Ken Dryden only ever had 12 wins in the playoffs as they were only three rounds there. So maybe he does deserve a mention, but he's not on the list of goalies with 15 wins in one playoffs.
    Associate Editor for DobberHockey (Wednesdays). Click that Ramblings button on the the menu bar!
    (No I don't have a hockey problem...)

  3. #108
    Location
    Ottawa
    Rep Power
    50

    The Great One

    Default Re: Stanley Cup Final: (A2) Boston Bruins vs. (C3) St. Louis Blues

    Quote Originally Posted by Eskimo Brother View Post
    Ken Dryden only ever had 12 wins in the playoffs as they were only three rounds there. So maybe he does deserve a mention, but he's not on the list of goalies with 15 wins in one playoffs.
    My point was more about the asterisk. If Patrick Roy gets an asterisk because the maximum amount of games he could win was 15 (which he did), why not give the same asterisk to Dryden (he won the maximum amount of games possible, which happened to be 12). Really, this "record" is about rookie goalies who win the Stanley cup. At least that's how I see it

  4. #109
    Rylant's Avatar
    Rylant is offline
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    3,812
    Location
    Edmonton, AB
    Rep Power
    50

    Dobber Sports Star

    Default Re: Stanley Cup Final: (A2) Boston Bruins vs. (C3) St. Louis Blues

    Quote Originally Posted by als_revenge View Post
    I'm not sure I'm buying what your selling re: consistency of holding penalties in the NFL. I agree that most of the really flagrant stuff does get called, but there is a huge variation in what gets called for marginal things, IMO.

    I'd also suggest you are comparing apples and oranges. You are comparing one kind of NHL penalty against every kind of NHL penalty. (How often are people on here complaining about a missed holding penalty in the NHL, or a missed hooking penalty?)
    My point is, that the reffing in the NFL tends to be very consistent. They don't alter what is called, and what is not called based on how important the game is. The line is well defined. You aren't allowed to goon the punter in the motion of kicking in a tight Superbowl without a call. You rarely see anybody in the NFL arguing with a referee suggesting that a call was missed that should have been called. That is a daily occurrence in the NHL.

    The line shifts in the NBA officiating as well, depending on game circumstances such as game importance and score. I just wish it was consistent across the board. The entire concept of "putting away the whistles and letting them play" during the really important games is such a flawed way to do it.

    Rylant

  5. #110
    Krysmo's Avatar
    Krysmo is offline
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    248
    Rep Power
    15

    Dobber Sports Prodigy

    Default Re: Stanley Cup Final: (A2) Boston Bruins vs. (C3) St. Louis Blues

    Quote Originally Posted by Rylant View Post
    My point is, that the reffing in the NFL tends to be very consistent. They don't alter what is called, and what is not called based on how important the game is. The line is well defined. You aren't allowed to goon the punter in the motion of kicking in a tight Superbowl without a call. You rarely see anybody in the NFL arguing with a referee suggesting that a call was missed that should have been called. That is a daily occurrence in the NHL.

    The line shifts in the NBA officiating as well, depending on game circumstances such as game importance and score. I just wish it was consistent across the board. The entire concept of "putting away the whistles and letting them play" during the really important games is such a flawed way to do it.

    Rylant
    Agreed on the 'putting away the whistles and letting them play' argument. Doing that only helps determine WHO is going to be playing - the goons or the skilled guys (in simplistic terms). It's why Don Cherry's favourite guys (the 3rd and 4th line guys) get so much love from him during the playoffs, they're not in the box where they should be a lot of the time.

  6. #111
    Location
    Ottawa
    Rep Power
    50

    The Great One

    Default Re: Stanley Cup Final: (A2) Boston Bruins vs. (C3) St. Louis Blues

    Quote Originally Posted by Rylant View Post
    My point is, that the reffing in the NFL tends to be very consistent. They don't alter what is called, and what is not called based on how important the game is. The line is well defined. You aren't allowed to goon the punter in the motion of kicking in a tight Superbowl without a call. You rarely see anybody in the NFL arguing with a referee suggesting that a call was missed that should have been called. That is a daily occurrence in the NHL.

    The line shifts in the NBA officiating as well, depending on game circumstances such as game importance and score. I just wish it was consistent across the board. The entire concept of "putting away the whistles and letting them play" during the really important games is such a flawed way to do it.

    Rylant
    https://www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/r...going-forward/


    NEW ORLEANS -- It's not often that you can get 73,000 people to all agree on something, but everybody inside the Mercedez-Benz Superdome definitely agreed on one thing after the Rams stunning 26-23 win over New Orleans on Sunday: The Saints got hosed by one of the worst no-calls in NFL history.

  7. #112
    Rylant's Avatar
    Rylant is offline
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    3,812
    Location
    Edmonton, AB
    Rep Power
    50

    Dobber Sports Star

    Default Re: Stanley Cup Final: (A2) Boston Bruins vs. (C3) St. Louis Blues

    Quote Originally Posted by als_revenge View Post
    https://www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/r...going-forward/


    NEW ORLEANS -- It's not often that you can get 73,000 people to all agree on something, but everybody inside the Mercedez-Benz Superdome definitely agreed on one thing after the Rams stunning 26-23 win over New Orleans on Sunday: The Saints got hosed by one of the worst no-calls in NFL history.
    I had a feeling that this may be brought up. Yes there is no question that this was a bad call. I watch a lot of NFL football. Off the top of my head, this is the single only instance that I can think of like this. I guess maybe there is an argument for the whole "tuck rule" fiasco. That was, what? 15 years ago?

    It seems silly, that my stating that the NFL officiating tends to be very consistent, is going to be refuted by stating one single instance. It sucks that the call happened in the first place, but one case is simply not enough to suggest that officiating in the NFL is not consistent. This kind of thing is perfectly commonplace in the NHL. I stand by my statement.

    Rylant

  8. #113
    Location
    Ontario
    Rep Power
    40

    Administrator

    Default Re: Stanley Cup Final: (A2) Boston Bruins vs. (C3) St. Louis Blues

    Quote Originally Posted by ericdaoust View Post
    Barbashev will have a hearing for his hit on Johansson. I'm thinking they give him one game as a "make up" call. Because NHL.
    As expected ^^^


    Contact me for Frozen Tools bug reports and inquiries
    Follow Frozen Tools on Twitter @FrozenTools
    Follow me on Twitter @DH_EricDaoust

  9. #114
    Krysmo's Avatar
    Krysmo is offline
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    248
    Rep Power
    15

    Dobber Sports Prodigy

    Default Re: Stanley Cup Final: (A2) Boston Bruins vs. (C3) St. Louis Blues

    Quote Originally Posted by ericdaoust View Post
    As expected ^^^
    Yeah and shameful. That was not an illegal hit to head, he was finishing his check. I'm against clear head shots and that was not one. Jacobs made a phone call to Bettman again...

  10. #115
    Godin's Avatar
    Godin is offline
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    4,907
    Location
    GTA
    Rep Power
    50

    Dobber Sports All-Star

    Default Re: Stanley Cup Final: (A2) Boston Bruins vs. (C3) St. Louis Blues

    Quote Originally Posted by Dennis View Post
    Everyone is up in arms over Bozak's trip but I can't get past Acciari's blatant embellishment of it. I truly think he hurt himself throwing his back to the ice dramatically. I probably wouldn't have called a penalty either after seeing Acciari 'crying wolf' and taking himself out of the play like that.
    Agreed. But still should have been a penalty.

    They seem to miss too many calls where the play is actually happening. Changes definitely need to be made this summer. It doesn't make sense to me that both referees AND both lineseman do not see these obvious infractions. I know the linesman can't make the calls but they do have input. The NHL needs an off ice official with more authority on these obvious infractions because it does change the game and the ref's should not influence the game in anyway. They are there to make sure the players are playing by the same rules.

  11. #116
    Rep Power
    20

    Dobber Sports Initiate

    Default Re: Stanley Cup Final: (A2) Boston Bruins vs. (C3) St. Louis Blues

    Quote Originally Posted by Dennis View Post
    Everyone is up in arms over Bozak's trip but I can't get past Acciari's blatant embellishment of it. I truly think he hurt himself throwing his back to the ice dramatically. I probably wouldn't have called a penalty either after seeing Acciari 'crying wolf' and taking himself out of the play like that.
    seriously? , now players are taking backwards dives? i didn't see it that way.
    24 team cap league, HTH Pts. 25 PLAYER ROSTER C3/LW3/RW3/F3/D6/G1

    G & A = 1PT.
    HT.BLK.PIM.SOG.=0.05 / PPP=0.5/ FOW=0.01/ +/- =.25
    W=2 SHO=3 SV=0.1 GA=-1 OL=1 SHL=1


    Connor - Barkov - Ehlers
    Hagel- Couturier - Tarasenko
    Frederic - Tyler Johnson - Nichuskin
    Vatrano - - Guriano

  12. #117
    Rylant's Avatar
    Rylant is offline
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    3,812
    Location
    Edmonton, AB
    Rep Power
    50

    Dobber Sports Star

    Default Re: Stanley Cup Final: (A2) Boston Bruins vs. (C3) St. Louis Blues

    Quote Originally Posted by Bobby4Ever View Post
    seriously? , now players are taking backwards dives? i didn't see it that way.
    Yes. I definitely saw a little grandstanding there. I would have no problem with an embellishment call there. I also think that there should have been a trip or slew foot call as well. I have no problem with making both calls.

    Rylant

  13. #118
    Location
    Alberta, Canada
    Rep Power
    50

    Dobber Sports Grand Master

    Default Re: Stanley Cup Final: (A2) Boston Bruins vs. (C3) St. Louis Blues

    In terms of missed calls, the Bozak trip is pretty low on the list. It’s in the spotlight because St. Louis scored right after, but stuff like that doesn’t get called pretty frequently in the playoffs and the trip didn’t really impact the clearing attempt. Definitely a penalty and definitely should always be called in a respectable and legitimate league, but we all know the NHL is neither of those things.

  14. #119
    Location
    Alberta, Canada
    Rep Power
    50

    Dobber Sports Grand Master

    Default Re: Stanley Cup Final: (A2) Boston Bruins vs. (C3) St. Louis Blues

    In terms of NFL reffing consistency, it’s always funny to me when people point to extreme single outliers (that’s immediately lead to a rule change) and thinks it counts as evidence for them and not against them.

  15. #120
    Location
    Ottawa
    Rep Power
    50

    The Great One

    Default Re: Stanley Cup Final: (A2) Boston Bruins vs. (C3) St. Louis Blues

    Quote Originally Posted by Rylant View Post
    I had a feeling that this may be brought up. Yes there is no question that this was a bad call. I watch a lot of NFL football. Off the top of my head, this is the single only instance that I can think of like this. I guess maybe there is an argument for the whole "tuck rule" fiasco. That was, what? 15 years ago?

    It seems silly, that my stating that the NFL officiating tends to be very consistent, is going to be refuted by stating one single instance. It sucks that the call happened in the first place, but one case is simply not enough to suggest that officiating in the NFL is not consistent. This kind of thing is perfectly commonplace in the NHL. I stand by my statement.

    Rylant
    The Patriots - Steelers playoff game, and that ridiculous call about James not getting the game winning touchdown also comes to mind. These are critical blunders that literally changed who went to the superbowl and who didn't. And that Steelers-Pats game was a couple years back. Two years in a row that it's been absolute crap who went to the Superbowl....

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •