Phaneuf steamrolls Okposo

wprager wrote:Wait, Tuk, are you using IE? I'm using Firefox (and, for the record, I'd rather enter flash tags manually than go back to IE).

I'm on Firefox

And all I am saying is that they *did* do something about it in the OHL, which means it can be done without ruining the integrity of the game. The NHL, though, cares more about the sensational aspect of having a body carried off the ice on a stretcher and the revenues it brings, then about the health of the players.

wprager wrote:And all I am saying is that they *did* do something about it in the OHL, which means it can be done without ruining the integrity of the game. The NHL, though, cares more about the sensational aspect of having a body carried off the ice on a stretcher and the revenues it brings, then about the health of the players.

It's not even close to the same game in the OHL. These are KIDS playing in the OHL vs men in the NHL. It's like saying the NHL should be run like Midget AAA. There is no logic there either.

The game has changed a bit in the OHL just so you know. Not even close to as physical and it has effected certain type of players in the game.

Also, thats a crock saying the NHL cares about people getting laid out and being taken off on a stretcher. It's a risk they take, no one likes seeing it, football guys go off on a stretcher but no one is saying take hitting out of the game. ITS PART OF THE GAME! YES, PEOPLE GETTING TAKEN OUT ON STRETCHERS IS PART OF THE GAME. Everyone knows it can happen to them... except Okposo apparently.

wprager wrote:Regarding feet leaving the ice. I'm not talking about the guy losing his balance after a hit and falling or stumbling. I didn't think I was arguing with a bunch of lawyers.

So if Gionta tries to line up Chara and his feet leave the ice, you think he should get a penalty? I think the league should invest in a proper training program for the refs- get them all on the same page and they should be able to discern what's deserved of a penalty and what's not. If a player's feet leave the ice to make a head shot, ya, we all agree, that should be automatic suspension. I just think by saying feet off the ice is automatic penalty will take away for the physical aspect of the game. Phaneuf's hit last night is a perfect example of that.

Vandelay wrote:

wprager wrote:Regarding feet leaving the ice. I'm not talking about the guy losing his balance after a hit and falling or stumbling. I didn't think I was arguing with a bunch of lawyers.

So if Gionta tries to line up Chara and his feet leave the ice, you think he should get a penalty? I think the league should invest in a proper training program for the refs- get them all on the same page and they should be able to discern what's deserved of a penalty and what's not. If a player's feet leave the ice to make a head shot, ya, we all agree, that should be automatic suspension. I just think by saying feet off the ice is automatic penalty will take away for the physical aspect of the game. Phaneuf's hit last night is a perfect example of that.

It's impossible, the game is way too fast. You need a computer or a robot to actually ref hockey down to the letter of the law. Just the way it is. That's why you never really hear me harp on the refs, I know how hard it is to do at a AAA and jr level, I cant even imagine how tough it is in the NHL.

N4L wrote:

Vandelay wrote:

wprager wrote:Regarding feet leaving the ice. I'm not talking about the guy losing his balance after a hit and falling or stumbling. I didn't think I was arguing with a bunch of lawyers.

So if Gionta tries to line up Chara and his feet leave the ice, you think he should get a penalty? I think the league should invest in a proper training program for the refs- get them all on the same page and they should be able to discern what's deserved of a penalty and what's not. If a player's feet leave the ice to make a head shot, ya, we all agree, that should be automatic suspension. I just think by saying feet off the ice is automatic penalty will take away for the physical aspect of the game. Phaneuf's hit last night is a perfect example of that.

It's impossible, the game is way too fast. You need a computer or a robot to actually ref hockey down to the letter of the law. Just the way it is. That's why you never really hear me harp on the refs, I know how hard it is to do at a AAA and jr level, I cant even imagine how tough it is in the NHL.

??? Not to pick on you again n4l but when that goal by spezza didn't get counted in the minute of the gam against florida you went on a tangent for 5 straight posts calling the refs a joke, brutal, as bad as you can get, black and white a even went racial and called him french. All because the refs missed the call.
Phaneuf is awesome. Bouwmeester sucks though.

Watching a puck go into the net is a different situation. If you want to pick and choose parts of arguements like that and use them where they basically have no basis.

These two incidents have absolutly nothing to do with each other.

Just for the record, "French" is not a freaking race, people. Man, when that Quebec player was called a frog by someone and they went all ballistic -- come on! No-one complains about Newfie jokes and it is not at all different. English are called "Limeys" because English sailors used to carry limes on long voyages (for the vitamin C, against scurvy). French go the nickname "frogs" because they considered frog legs a delicacy. It may be used in a derogatory sense (although not intended as such originally) but it pokes fun at an item of national cuisine. Nothing racial about that. Nothing racial about saying the ref was French. Biased? You bet. Politically incorrect? Absolutely (it is N4L, after all). But let's save the race card when someone is actually being racist.

OK, I'm off my soap box.

N4L wrote:Watching a puck go into the net is a different situation. If you want to pick and choose parts of arguements like that and use them where they basically have no basis.

These two incidents have absolutly nothing to do with each other.

It does when you make a blanket statement like "That's why you never really hear me harp on the refs"

The Spezza goal is a non-issue. In the regular season they simply would have gone upstairs for a review and it would have counted. Not so in the preseason. I don't know if they've got that ability for hits and such. If they don't, maybe they should. For the record, I think the hit in question in this thread was legal and Phaneuf left his feet due to momentum. Drawing the line is nearly impossible one what constitutes leaving their feet.

I can't believe I'm defending Neely, but that puck wasn't moving slowly, and ended up in the corner of the net, just laying there. There was nothing split-second about it. His point earlier was about calling hits (and other plays) that happen in split second at a breakneck speed, with 10 skaters chasing one little puck.

For the record, I still cannot comprehend how that ref could have called that off. I mean, sure, when it went up in the air over the goalie's glove, there was no proving that it was over the line (unless you had an overview angle). But when it flopped down on the corner, it was clearly in. The ref was standing right over it. Probably didn't have the balls to admit he made an early cann and was wrong.

It's amazing how people look for thing to take me to task on and while doing bring it completly out of context.

Ill just say nothing next time The Sens score a goal and the refs calls it off for absolutly no reason.

Some people are here are pretty sad sometimes...

Wprager said it all there, he was bang on.

Questioning a ref making a penalty call on a split second event is one thing, blowing an absolute obvious and simple call is another. But hey, it was from the expected people so I probably shouldnt be too shocked.

Oh, and I was right about the guy being french also...

N4L wrote:It's amazing how people look for thing to take me to task on and while doing bring it completly out of context.

Ill just say nothing next time The Sens score a goal and the refs calls it off for absolutly no reason.

Some people are here are pretty sad sometimes...

Wprager said it all there, he was bang on.

Questioning a ref making a penalty call on a split second event is one thing, blowing an absolute obvious and simple call is another. But hey, it was from the expected people so I probably shouldnt be too shocked.

It's probably because your statements aren't usually open to interpretation. Saying things like, this or that will happen I guarantee it doesn't leave room to consider that you could have meant something else. When you say "That's why you never really hear me harp on the refs" people take it as "I don't harp on refs", therefore, when you actually do it, it sounds hypocritical. You might try something like "That's why you never really hear me harp on the refs on a split second call happening at full speed", instead of making such a blanket statement that covers everything related to reffing.

Ah, that's just Neely being Neely.