Stoner

Good to see George Costanza's cousin in the crowd making love to that popcorn.

Side of the net. Still...

That seems gratuitous.

Goal announcement off the ensuing faceoff. Beautiful. Pull the bandaid off.

Let's go Winnipeg?

Anna Kendrick?

Done! They're creepy and they're kooky Mysterious and spooky They're all together ooky The Sabres family Their house is a museum When people come to see 'em They really are a scream The Sabres family. Neat. Sweet. Petite. So get a witch's shawl on A broomstick you can crawl on We're gonna pay a call on The Sabres family Aren't some people unable to remove their hats?

Who said only? You have to have four before five. Also a nine-game winning streak contains a four-game winning streak. Several of them, actually.

Even during this Pegula Reign of Error, the Sabres have had winning streaks (defined as three or more wins in a row). 11–12 — Two four-game winning streaks 12–13 — Four three-game winning streaks 13–14 — One three-game winning streak 14–15 — One four-game winning streak 15–16 — Two three-game winning streaks 16–17 — Two three-game winning streaks 17–18 — One three-game winning streak 18–19 — One three-game winning streak and one 10-game winning streak 19–20 — Four three-game winning streaks 20–21 — Zippo 21–22 — One three-game winning streak That's a lot of winning! FTR, they've had 16 three-game winning streaks that failed to extend to four games. Weird. It's time for a four-game winning streak!

Still 10. It's not getting worse! And would get better tonight if the Bruins lose to the Knights and the Sabres beat the Jets. (Wings and Jackets are nine points up and play the Islanders and Canucks tonight, respectively.) Cocaine's a helluva drug.

Merely Where it took place.

I don't deny the urinating.

That's not pompous a'tall.

Not necessarily.

Does he look like a goalie playing on hope? (I know it's a good thing, maybe the best of things.)

I do like the idea of thinking of this season's team as almost a science experiment — but we have two variables that make it difficult to draw conclusions. Remove one variable and have good goaltending so the rest can be judged fairly. Ah, well, to coin a phrase, that sail has shipped (R.I.P. Coach Hank).

WTF. My GDT notification chime just jingled. These things always come in the wee small hours.

I'll need to know where to mail the fruit and cheese platter, wine, fine chocolates, alpaca socks and live lobsters.

Anybody can BUILD a playoff team.

I had to chuckle at nfreeman citing the lack of coverage of officiating in The Athletic. They're all in bed together!

I have your shams when you're ready. TIL you really don't want to refrigerate a shortbread crust. The top crust is now harder than inkman in line behind Mike Peca at Wegmans. Merry Christmas!

Upon further review, it's hard to tell how long the respective reviews took. The goal review was a little under a minute, but was probably longer because the ref was talking to the situation room about the offside. Cameras didn't catch when the linesmen put on their headsets, so you can't time it. It was still a quick review. Speaking of the linesmen... what role do they play? They're looking at a smallish tablet. But we were told Toronto made the call?

For this take to have more weight, I'd have to go back and see how long the Milano and offside reviews took. It's my impression that the Milano review was quite quick, and although the offside review took longer, it took considerably less time than the original review — whether a puck that clearly landed in the top of the net should result in a good goal. The take — reviews that could cost the lowly Buffalo Sabres a point or two were not given the time they deserved; they were given considerably less time than a review that could cost a good team (read: a team having a good season; I don't buy MFT nonsense) a game or a review that could cost a team a Cup. IMHO that's the heart of the bias problem. The same review in all three scenarios should take the same time.

OK, and the original spot? When I watched the play live, it seemed clear the runner was held short. The official at the top of the screen running down the yard line where the ball was ultimately placed — that looked absolutely bizarre to me. Maybe we'll agree it was a bad spot, and the replay wasn't clear enough to overturn it. Either way...