Stanley Cup Playoffs Game Discussion Thread

[Bmwolf21]

Just one late game tonight - can Soupy and the Sharks stay alive for one more game?

 

Friday's Game

Dallas at San Jose, Game 5 (Dallas leads 3-1) 10 p.m. ET, Versus - Preview

[GoatheadInCT]

NOPE. san Jose got lucky once, and I don't see it happening again. Teams in this situation usually have used up what is left in their tank, and get rolled. I say Dallas "FO SHO" tonight.

[Swedesessed]

I say the Sharks win tonight 3-2. I expect the sharks to come out like gangbusters early, get the home crowd going, and swing the pressure back on the Stars for an almost must win Game 6 in the Big D.

[Bmwolf21]

Sharks win 5-1. Soupy scores three, knocks out Turco AND Modano with crushing hits, and drives the Zamboni between periods. In his postgame interview he says "Where's my 25+ page thread on SabreSpace, beyotches?"

[Claude Balls]

Sharks win 5-1. Soupy scores three, knocks out Turco AND Modano with crushing hits, and drives the Zamboni between periods. In his postgame interview he says "Where's my 25+ page thread on SabreSpace, beyotches?"

You forgot selling "Cold Beer Here" in between his 50 shifts.

[Bmwolf21]

You forgot selling "Cold Beer Here" in between his 50 shifts.

Hmmm..nothing yet...Soupy must be waiting for the third period to make it a natural hatty...

[Bmwolf21]

I don't know about anyone else, but I am getting sick and tired of the seemingly never-ending goal controversies - was it in/not in; was it kicked/hit with a high stick; off the glove, etc.? Maybe the NHL could start looking at the goal definitions as whole and start closing some loopholes and make some sort of uniform standard for all goals scored. Let's get rid of the gray areas and take the ambiguitiy out of the process. Also, could we get some damn RF chips in the pucks ( so we know whether the puck crosses the goal line or not) and uniform camera angles for all buildings while we're at it?

/rant

 

I don't see how the Morrow goal could be considered kicking it in, given him trying to drag his skate to stop and the puck being behind him and out of his field of vision, but the NHL sure saw it as a kick.

[Bmwolf21]

Soupy scores his first of the playoffs at a very opportune time, tying the game and eventually forcing OT...

[carpandean]

I agreed with both calls, though the first was a much harder call. Morrow lifted his back foot up to meet the puck first and then brought it forward. During the lift he was still looking back. The second was clearly an attempt to bring it down to his stick using his glove, but he never made contact.

 

While it wasn't the case here, I feel that if your hand is still on the stick then you should be able to deflect the puck in off of it. If you take your hand off (as Marrow did here), then it should be no goal.

 

 

 

Brian Campbell ties it up at 2!

[Bmwolf21]

Hmmm...interesting. Pavelski pots the GWG just 1:05 into OT and the Sharks are still alive...

 

I agreed with both calls, though the first was a much harder call. Morrow lifted his back foot up to meet the puck first and then brought it forward. During the lift he was still looking back. The second was clearly an attempt to bring it down to his stick using his glove, but he never made contact.

 

While it wasn't the case here, I feel that if your hand is still on the stick then you should be able to deflect the puck in off of it. If you take your hand off (as Marrow did here), then it should be no goal.

Brian Campbell ties it up at 2!

I'm just tired of all the ambiguity and constant debate. Time to start streamlining the standards.

[Taro T]

I agreed with both calls, though the first was a much harder call. Morrow lifted his back foot up to meet the puck first and then brought it forward. During the lift he was still looking back. The second was clearly an attempt to bring it down to his stick using his glove, but he never made contact.

 

While it wasn't the case here, I feel that if your hand is still on the stick then you should be able to deflect the puck in off of it. If you take your hand off (as Marrow did here), then it should be no goal.

Brian Campbell ties it up at 2!

I disagree with the 1st call, but definitely agree with the 2nd. I don't see any way that Morrow could have intentionally kicked the puck on the 1st one when you consider that he was tied up by the defenseman.

[X. Benedict]

I disagree with the 1st call, but definitely agree with the 2nd. I don't see any way that Morrow could have intentionally kicked the puck on the 1st one when you consider that he was tied up by the defenseman.

 

That first one has me shaking my head. What is the purpose of the rule if it

undoes goals like that? To prevent goals that are more kicky by lumping them together

with goals that only look that way in slow motion. You can't tell me that you can play that

goal at regular speed and detect a clear kicking motion. And that is the speed the game is play

at.

 

I can understand using slow motion to see if a puck has crossed the goal-line.

But I think kicks should be clear at regular speed.

 

And what a great little play by Roenick and Campbell. That one goal just might send

his stock soaring again.

[stenbaro]

SOUPY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! :wallbash:

 

 

[deluca67]

I disagree with the 1st call, but definitely agree with the 2nd. I don't see any way that Morrow could have intentionally kicked the puck on the 1st one when you consider that he was tied up by the defenseman.

If Morrow kicked that puck in on purpose that would make him the greatest hockey player of all-time. If that same play happens in Dallas and everything is exactly the same they count the goal. Officiating continues to be the greatest source of embarrassment to the NHL. On-Ice, Reviews or supplemental discipline are all areas that need to have major overhauls. There is someone in the NHL offices that believes that the WWE style of officiating is the way to go. That person needs to be removed.