That's the series

[B21]

He was clearly pulled down. That you don't see it that way means your hatred for Crosby and the Pens has jaded your view. I don't know how anyone watching the video can't see two hands on his shoulder pulling him back and down. So the argument has to be that Strait was just resting his hands there? Pushing him to open the gap between the two? Oh I know! Shoving him closer to Nabakov to cut down his shooting angle. I think it's clear from the separation of the puck from Crosby's stick.. Physics being physics and all.. That Crosby was slowed down. That's a polite way of saying "impeded"... Which happens to be in the rule called "holding"... Which also happens to be what the call was.

Don't waste the energy. If that were Orpik pulling down Giroux they would have wanted a penalty shot.

[canoli]

I said before if that were Giroux I'd want a doctor to take a look at him STAT because obviously he's struggling to stay on his feet. Either that or I'd assume he was trying to buy the call.

Maybe I'm just "old school" (or maybe just old! lol) but I hate seeing more than a couple PPs a game. It's a huge advantage. I think since the "new NHL" fans have forgotten (or are ignoring) what an incredible advantage it is to skate 5 on 4. Who the hell wants that? For one team to have this huge advantage over the other? Esp after 60 minutes of a hard-fought game...to see it end like that...

We're fans of different teams but we're fans of NHL hockey first and foremost. Don't you want to see the games decided by the players as opposed to the officials?

[nossagog]

I said before if that were Giroux I'd want a doctor to take a look at him STAT because obviously he's struggling to stay on his feet. Either that or I'd assume he was trying to buy the call.

Maybe I'm just "old school" (or maybe just old! lol) but I hate seeing more than a couple PPs a game. It's a huge advantage. I think since the "new NHL" fans have forgotten (or are ignoring) what an incredible advantage it is to skate 5 on 4. Who the hell wants that? For one team to have this huge advantage over the other? Esp after 60 minutes of a hard-fought game...to see it end like that...

We're fans of different teams but we're fans of NHL hockey first and foremost. Don't you want to see the games decided by the players as opposed to the officials?

See, here's something that I can understand and appreciate. Yes the 5-4 is a hugh advantage. I'm not that old, but REAL old school would go way back to the days when every penalty was for the duration of its time, not how it is now where the player is released on minors after a goal. Some teams were SOOOO good, they would score 2 or 3 goals on a two minute penalty, so they changed the rule

So I can see your point about an advantage being given at ANY point in a game. But lets look at the opposite. Do you think that the Devils would have won any Stanley Cups if they had call had called player obstruction penalties at even half the rate that do today back in the dead offense days? Part of the reason was Brodeur, but a big part was you couldn't get throught the neutral zone without getting hooked or held onto. I, as a fan of the game, don't want to see the game deteriorate back to all the hooking, holding and interference that was going on back then. Or worse, you build a team for speed, get to the playoffs, or to overtime, and you can't even get a scoring oppurtunity because of all the obstruction. Players play the game to what's being called. If the Ref's go back to not calling that stuff, then the players will take full advantage and we'll go back to all games being played in the neurtal zone and little in the way of offense.

Do we really want to see the Devils trap, or the putrid Lightning 1-3-1 sweeper played everyone? Because if you let that stuff go, that's what's going to happen, especially by teams with less talent, to compensate for the skill difference.

No thanks,

Wouldn't you rather see the game decided by talented players rather than grinders taking advantage of a turnovers caused by hooking and holding?

Edited May 7, 2013 by nossagog

[B21]

I said before if that were Giroux I'd want a doctor to take a look at him STAT because obviously he's struggling to stay on his feet. Either that or I'd assume he was trying to buy the call.

Maybe I'm just "old school" (or maybe just old! lol) but I hate seeing more than a couple PPs a game. It's a huge advantage. I think since the "new NHL" fans have forgotten (or are ignoring) what an incredible advantage it is to skate 5 on 4. Who the hell wants that? For one team to have this huge advantage over the other? Esp after 60 minutes of a hard-fought game...to see it end like that...

We're fans of different teams but we're fans of NHL hockey first and foremost. Don't you want to see the games decided by the players as opposed to the officials?

Of course I hate seeing games decided by officials but short of the on-ice or replay officials blowing an obvious goal call (or no-goal) that actually does decide the outcome, I'll never concede that a PP called late in a game or in OT costs a team the game. Kill. The. Penalty.

The Pens killed a "bogus" PP down 2-0 early in the 1st period of Game 3. A goal there by the Isles and it's a completely different game. Ditto the Iginla call with about 7 minutes left in a 4-4 game. So why isn't anyone complaining about those calls?

I've said before - I have no problem that the officials will bury the whistle in OT on a lot of calls they would have made in regulation. BUT - I don't want to see no-holds-barred-prevent-a-goal-at-all-costs stuff NOT get called either.

If it's clear that a player was held, hooked, tripped...whatever...and that hold, hook or trip meant that a scoring chance was averted then yes - that penalty should be called.

Strait did just that. He was beaten and did the only thing he could do to prevent a scoring chance (and yes - that was a scoring chance at a minimum). He grabbed Crosby by the shoulders and pulled him down. Penalty.

Crosby was not skating at full speed. He kept control of his stick and even managed to direct the puck to the net. And of course - he fell backwards which is what happens when someone pulls your shoulders from behind.

I'll say it again - if this is anyone but Crosby this isn't even a discussion.

[B21]

See, here's something that I can understand and appreciate. Yes the 5-4 is a hugh advantage. I'm not that old, but REAL old school would go way back to the days when every penalty was for the duration of its time, not how it is now where the player is released on minors after a goal. Some teams were SOOOO good, they would score 2 or 3 goals on a two minute penalty, so they changed the rule

So I can see your point about an advantage being given at ANY point in a game. But lets look at the opposite. Do you think that the Devils would have won any Stanley Cups if they had call had called player obstruction penalties at even half the rate that do today back in the dead offense days? Part of the reason was Brodeur, but a big part was you couldn't get throught the neutral zone without getting hooked or held onto. I, as a fan of the game, don't want to see the game deteriorate back to all the hooking, holding and interference that was going on back then. Or worse, you build a team for speed, get to the playoffs, or to overtime, and you can't even get a scoring oppurtunity because of all the obstruction. Players play the game to what's being called. If the Ref's go back to not calling that stuff, then the players will take full advantage and we'll go back to all games being played in the neurtal zone and little in the way of offense.

Do we really want to see the Devils trap, or the putrid Lightning 1-3-1 sweeper played everyone? Because if you let that stuff go, that's what's going to happen, especially by teams with less talent, to compensate for the skill difference.

No thanks,

Wouldn't you rather see the game decided by talented players rather than grinders taking advantage of a turnovers caused by hooking and holding?

The easy answer is....

The call benefitted the Pens so it must be bogus. Crosby dove. That call should not be made in regulation. Blah. Blah. Blah.

If that situation were reversed (say Glass taking down Tavares) there would not be a single peep about the "injustice" done to the Pens...because it would be seen as the correct call. Guaranteed. Sure as heckfire would not have had JR and Milbury ranting about it.

Now - if the Pens win the Cup the "bias/conspiracy" element can point to Game 3 and say "Aha! You never should have won that game....blah blah blah!" That assumes that had the Pens not scored on the PP the Isles would have evnetually won and that the Isles would have won the series even though that game would have made it 2-1 as opposed to...say...4-1.

I've been around since the Philly.com days and still see arguments that Malkin not getting the 1-game instigator suspension is why we won the Cup. :wacko:

[canoli]

Okay B well I tried - twice now - to tell you what I'd think if Giroux had made that move. In a joking way, true (about calling the doctor), but I followed that with "I'd assume he's trying to buy a call." I never lied to you before so I'm not sure what your problem is now, why you continue the mind-reading act but whatever. You obviously don't believe a word I say so I'll drop it.

Nosa - I hear ya but nobody is advocating going back to the '80s. I just don't appreciate weak or borderline calls in OT, and esp not in the POs. This is supposed to be NHL PO hockey, the best of the best. One of the strongest skaters in the whole league wipes out because a defender has his hands on him...and that's considered a legit penalty. I wasn't surprised when they called it, just disgusted. To me it's just sad because it seems guys more than ever play the refs as much as they play the game. Yeah it was probably worse in the '70s and '80s but we've over-corrected in my opinion, by a lot.

[B21]

Okay B well I tried - twice now - to tell you what I'd think if Giroux had made that move. In a joking way, true (about calling the doctor), but I followed that with "I'd assume he's trying to buy a call." I never lied to you before so I'm not sure what your problem is now, why you continue the mind-reading act but whatever. You obviously don't believe a word I say so I'll drop it.

Sorry - I gotta call BS on that one. Not my first rodeo, C. I've been using Tavares but since you brought Giroux up...

If that same play happens and it's Giroux playing the role of Crosby, everyone here would be clamoring for a penalty. Everyone...because it was a penalty that should have been called. More specific to Giroux - he can do no wrong. I saw radoran get skewered for daring to question his leadership and performance this year. And now I'm supposed to believe that Flyer fans would call out Giroux for a dive in that spot? Yeah - when sheep fly.

[nossagog]

Nosa - I hear ya but nobody is advocating going back to the '80s. I just don't appreciate weak or borderline calls in OT, and esp not in the POs. This is supposed to be NHL PO hockey, the best of the best. One of the strongest skaters in the whole league wipes out because a defender has his hands on him...and that's considered a legit penalty. I wasn't surprised when they called it, just disgusted. To me it's just sad because it seems guys more than ever play the refs as much as they play the game. Yeah it was probably worse in the '70s and '80s but we've over-corrected in my opinion, by a lot.

Yeah, as I said previously, players will do what they can get away with. In this case, I'll agree to disagree, having watched Crosby play an aweful lot. Did he go down easy? Looked so, but why would he do that on purpose if in needed one or two mor strides to get a point blank shot on goal. Just don't see it, but I understand how you do.

And since you had a problem with that one, how about the Great 8 last night. Late in the third a stick comes up high on him and he goes down on his knees grabbing his face like someone tossed acid at it(second time this year he's done that), only to get right up and still get a scoring chance, and draw the penalty. In this case, they didn't score on the PP, so no ones talking about it.

Edited May 7, 2013 by nossagog

[nossagog]

Okay, a minute in and Tavaras stumbles easily to draw a weak penalty. Let's see the posts on that.

[nossagog]

Oh my God!!!, Another weak penalty on the Pens, I think I'll cry. Wahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh!

[nossagog]

Three penalties on the Pens and NONE on the Isles, THE SKY IS FALLING, AHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH. Its a Conspiracy, IT MUST BE. Someone call Uncle Gary, what is he thinking

Edited May 7, 2013 by nossagog

[Polaris922]

Gotta say... Some weak calls there. Tavares embellished. Orpik's gets for retaliating after taking a cheap shot to the kidney... Now Cooke for interference when the puck looked to be in their feet... If anyone felt the calls were lopsided in our favor they have to reconsider now! Lol

[nossagog]

Gotta say... Some weak calls there. Tavares embellished. Orpik's gets for retaliating after taking a cheap shot to the kidney... Now Cooke for interference when the puck looked to be in their feet... If anyone felt the calls were lopsided in our favor they have to reconsider now! Lol

Polaris, what are you thinking.

No, they won't.

[Polaris922]

Nabokov got shot!!

[nossagog]

Nabokov got shot!!

No he didn't, you have to look at it in super slo mo, cooke took a blackjack from his glove and hit him in the head as he went by. THAT was the reason he went down so easy

[Polaris922]

Oh my goodness! I missed all that! Damn black & gold tinted lenses!

[pensuck]

Should've been a 5 on 3 with a brutal hook on letang. Luckily the isles still scored.

Being a pens fan you obviously don't know how it works. The refs will keep the series close but when it really counts the pens will and do get the calls. Like I said b4. Why would they want to market the isles over buttmans boy Cindy? Actually maybe we can call him Greg Luganis the way he dives. Hahaha, pathetic.

[Polaris922]

Again flyersuck proves he knows nothing... Next caller...

[trevluk]

It wasn't a penalty until he fell down on his own. Should've been 2 for embellishing on top of it. Especially at that point of the game. It was a joke and everyone that's not a pens fan knows it. Next...

Sorry, not a Pens fan, in fact I'm pretty much a Pens hater, but after looking at the replay a few times, that was definitely a penalty if you are going by the book. It was a very soft call and Syd went down way too easy for how strong of a skater he is. (It has to be definitive to call embellishment so not sure the rule would apply to falling that easily but...) Anyhow, as I said, soft call, especially in over time but by the rule book, it was a penalty.

[canoli]

Wow look at that... Isles/Pens series is tied at 2 apiece, Fleury can't find the puck, Tavares gets the GWer... and the Habs lost in OT...

The lark’s on the wing;

The snail’s on the thorn;

God’s in His heaven—All’s right with the world!

Now that was a helluva fun game to watch...a few lame calls early on but none* in the 3rd, the way it should be. Funny though...seems it's a little harder for the Pens to win once the refs put the whistles away isn't it?

Heehehe... (JK)

Nassau Coleseum hasn't heard that much noise since the Grateful Dead played there. I still figure you guys for R2 but you have a hard question to answer before Thursday night: Does Vokoun get the start? Welcome to the Flyers fan's world LOL. You know when your goalie gets compared to Michael Leighton things are looking dismal. (in the shout box, after Czikis' goal)

*[edit: how could I forget, the well-known DIVER Colin McDonald called for embellishing Malkin's hold early in the 3rd]

Edited May 8, 2013 by canoli

[Polaris922]

@canoli

Fleury has been horrible since game 1. The refs were putting the Pens in the box in the first not the other way around! Lol. I think we'll beat them too, but between Fleury's flops and the Isles efforts its a tight series. Of course they played all but 2 games against us to 1 goal differences in the season too.

[TedZep]

I there really a difference between diving and "going down easy"? Diving vs. Embellishing maybe? I haven't seen much differentiating between the two here over the years.

You tell us, you've had the opportunity to watch the Master work that dastardly craft these past several years. Crosby earned that reputation legitimately. It's like the story of Bob who builds bridges... but to they call him that after the sheep incidents? Nope. In Sid's case it was a LOT more than one sheep.

Edited May 8, 2013 by TedZep

[canoli]

Fleury has been horrible since game 1.

Yeah I guess. I missed most of G1 but I saw G2, G3 and G4 and he just looks completely unprepared for what happens (on the goals against him). What can explain it? In the shout box, trying to come up with answers...some said "he's distracted, he just had his first kid" but that doesn't explain last year....some said "pressure" but this guy is a Cup-winning goalie who was outstanding when he won it.

It's one of the strangest stories in the POs...this MAF meltdown (or whatever it is).

[edit: just read that Vokoun is 3-0 vs. the Isles this year, one of them a shutout. If that's true then there's no way Blysma can stick with Fleury for G5, not when he's got Vokoun waiting with that record]

Edited May 8, 2013 by canoli

[B21]

Okay, a minute in and Tavaras stumbles easily to draw a weak penalty. Let's see the posts on that.

Crickets....

[B21]

You tell us, you've had the opportunity to watch the Master work that dastardly craft these past several years. Crosby earned that reputation legitimately. It's like the story of Bob who builds bridges... but to they call him that after the sheep incidents? Nope. In Sid's case it was a LOT more than one sheep.

It's been so long...you saw Barber (the founding father of Diving). How does Sid compare?