Taro T

Let them BOTH be reviewable; but the review has a limit of 30 seconds (maybe a minute) of observation and if you can't determine conclusively that the call was wrong then the call stands as originally called. What's really dumb is a coach can challenge a "missed play stoppage" such as the puck hitting the netting above the glass or a missed hand pass but a blown icing call ISN'T a "missed play stoppage." This league, quite often, stinks.

Yes, Byram "drove" Draisatl into Lyon's leg. Sure. Byram nudged him towards Lyon and then Draisatl chose to use that as an excuse to move Lyon's leg about 2'. Funny how guys that are pretty good skaters lose all control when it's convenient. Yes, skaters on all 32 teams do that. It is what it is. And the Sabres shouldn't have put themselves in the position where Draisatl could do that. But 100% that exact play is a judgement call that doesn't always go as it ended up getting called. Krebs shouldn't have iced it; whomever was supposed to be paying attention to McDavid shouldn't have lost him. They'd had chances to seal the victory with an extra goal on the 5v3; they didn't get that done. But 100%, that goal might've gotten called back had the reviewers in TO been in a different mood.

McLeod gave the guy a cross check while he was still lying on the ice. Soooo, no, not really.

Yes, Lyon did leave the crease on his own (at least his 1 leg was out of the crease, though the rest of him was in the crease). BUT players are NOT allowed to initiate contact with goalies regardless of where they are are the ice. Soooooo ... that one pretty much stays a "judgement" call for the league and they judged the Eulers losing in regulation was less desireable than a bottom feeder like the Sabres finally winning one in regulation.

The icing was on the 1st Euler's goal.

Tweaked something in warmups. What's that, out for a month?

Hope not. Means he suffered a pretty bad concussion if he is.

Nice win. Really wanted to see them win it in regulation. Would've been something they could look back on - remember that time we managed to keep our end clean even though the WC defending Eulers were throwing everything they could at us for the last 18 or so minutes. Well, we actually can do it. We did it then, let's do it tonight. It wouldn't have been truly season altering, but you need something like that to start getting the ship turned around on the road. Winning in OT isn't the same.

FTFY. ;)

No, he's actually scoring. 😉

Yeah, pretty much, if the hand stays on the stick it should be immaterial if it glances off the guy's glove or his stick. At times it really does seem that the powers that be in the league have no idea as to how the game is actually played. And in that game earlier on the road trip agreed 100% that the puck wasn't directed into the net with the guy's glove, BUT if THAT was a hand pass, that other goal absolutely was gloved in.

Or for whatever reason he trusts his buddy Forton to not be an imbecile and Forton's still telling him how great it is to work for Adams and any day now they just know they'll turn the corner. Seth Appert's watched other PP's in action and has been working with the analytics department to improve it. Shoot, maybe that's Appert's problem. He thinks a long PP is what they want totally neglecting that the motion and getting results is what's really important.

Bills Texasses. Texass KR catches ball in the end zone and then drops it without 1st having taken a knee. Bills recover in the end zone. Refs called it a TD. After conferring (at the backup refs request) they decide improperly to overrule the call; but they didn't even change it to a safety deciding the ball was dead in the endzone (same as if it had rolled out fo the endzone after he'd've controlled it and then lost it) they called it a fair catch, Texass ball on the 20. And the rationale was, well he meant to declare himself down/ take a knee. Problem is, they don't adjudicate plays on what a guy meant to do, they adjudicate plays on what a guy ACTUALLY did. And that guy fumbled the ball and the Bills should've added either 6 or 2 points to their score then.

The reasonable position to take would be that the Iggles keep the ball and continue that 2nd possession of the OT. However, technically, it is the 4th possession of OT and because the Bolts had the lead, the game should be over. Would be quite surprised if the league thought that far through their new OT rules, and considering they've already ignored a clear rule in a playoff game and allowed the backup refs to overturn the actual refs in said playoff game; expect that the league would ask itself "what would Taylor Swift want done here" and then act accordingly.

He still (or back to being) on McDavid's line?