• For users coming over from tmlfans.ca your username will remain the same but you will need to use the password reset feature (check your spam folder) on the login page in order to set your password. If you encounter issues, email Rick couchmanrick@gmail.com

Round 1: Canadiens (A1) vs. Senators (W1)

It's pretty impressive that Markov's been able to continue being a 24+ minute defenceman these part few years considering how incredibly slow he's become.
 
Wow,  almost a second blown call situation as a Montreal player knocked Price's helmet off as Zibenejad is shooting at an open net
 
Was hoping the Sens could have pulled it off.  They had to do it, but I wonder if starting Hammond instead of Anderson, who was excellent in the series, perhaps was their undoing. 

Do I ever love Price.  Would kill to have a goalie remotely of his calibre.

Will be interesting to see what happens with Bryan Murray's position.  He makes it sound like he wants to continue, but I also read he was working on his successor.  All in all, wish him all the best with his health.  He looks more frail, but I didn't think he looked like someone who was terminal.
 
CarltonTheBear said:
Anybody who didn't vote for Price for the Hart Trophy is probably shaking their head right now.
Click to expand...

I don't think it'll be unanimous or anything but I have to imagine that's a relatively small contingent to begin with.
 
The series really could have gone either way.  Ottawa could just as easily be the team moving on.  Must be a stinger to have that disallowed goal, it should have been 1-1 at that point, then who knows what would have happened.  Price was beyond solid and basically won the series but so was Anderson and he doesn't get half the credit Price does.  Must be so frustrating for him to allow less than 1 goal/game and still come up short.  Small sample but he had the best GAA and Save% in the playoffs  but you just don't hear about it as much. 

I'm sure Ottawa as a team and city are very proud.  Still think Stone's a wuss though.

On to round 2!   
 
It was the first time Ottawa had been shut out this season.

Whoa!  Those Sens really made the Canadiens sweat in this series, if not for the Habs netminding maestro in Carey Price, who knows what the outcome would have been.

Of course, we can say the same of Ottawa's Craig Anderson.

This series had all the makings of intensity and rivalry the more it went on.  Great hockey.
 
L K said:
If Ottawa loses by one goal tonight there is going to be some seriously murdered refs.  They blew down a play that Price never had control of and on the same sequence in the flow of the play Ottawa scored so it was a play that wasn't affected by the blown whistle.

Montreal up 1-0
Click to expand...

So this was apparently a rule change for this season:

* Rule 38.4 (viii) has been modified to allow broader discretion to Hockey Operations to assist the referees in determining the legitimacy of all potential goals (e.g., to ensure they are "good hockey goals"). The revised Rule will allow Hockey Operations to correct a broader array of situations where video review clearly establishes that a "goal" or "no goal" call on the ice has been made in error. The new expanded rule will also allow Hockey Operations to provide guidance to referees on goal and potential goal plays where the referee has blown his whistle (or intended to blow his whistle) after having lost sight of the puck.
Click to expand...

http://www.nhl.com/ice/news.htm?id=730165

Why wasn't that used?  Does it not apply because the puck was shot into the net instead of going in on its own?

EDIT:  Exact wording.

(viii) The video review process shall be permitted to assist the Referees in determining the legitimacy of all potential goals (e.g. to ensure they are ?good hockey goals?). For example (but not limited to), pucks that enter the net by going through the net meshing, pucks that enter the net from underneath the net frame, pucks that hit the spectator netting prior to being directed into the goal, pucks that enter the net undetected by the Referee, etc. This would also include situations whereby the Referee stops play or is in the process of stopping the play because he has lost sight of the puck and it is subsequently determined by video review that the puck crosses (or has crossed) the goal line and enters the net as the culmination of a continuous play where the result was unaffected by the whistle (i.e., the timing of the whistle was irrelevant to the puck entering the net at the end of a continuous play).
Click to expand...
 
There's video of the play over at deadspin

http://deadspin.com/whos-going-to-beat-carey-price-1700359064

The question for me, I think, is whether or not Petry eases up on playing Pageau after the whistle. I think he does or, at the very least, there's enough doubt in my mind that you have to err on the side of not allowing the goal. That sucks for Ottawa but I think if there's any doubt that the play was affected by the whistle you have to accept the occasional human error.
 
Potvin29 said:
EDIT:  Exact wording.

This would also include situations whereby the Referee stops play or is in the process of stopping the play because he has lost sight of the puck and it is subsequently determined by video review that the puck crosses (or has crossed) the goal line and enters the net as the culmination of a continuous play where the result was unaffected by the whistle (i.e., the timing of the whistle was irrelevant to the puck entering the net at the end of a continuous play).
Click to expand...
Click to expand...

Did they go upstairs on that one at all? Even if they did, I'm not sure they'd have overruled it. It may have even been less than a second, but I think the whistle going off before the puck was tapped in would be enough of an argument that Price and the Habs defenders could have assumed the play was dead and that may have effected the play.
 
CarltonTheBear said:
Potvin29 said:
EDIT:  Exact wording.

This would also include situations whereby the Referee stops play or is in the process of stopping the play because he has lost sight of the puck and it is subsequently determined by video review that the puck crosses (or has crossed) the goal line and enters the net as the culmination of a continuous play where the result was unaffected by the whistle (i.e., the timing of the whistle was irrelevant to the puck entering the net at the end of a continuous play).
Click to expand...
Click to expand...

Did they go upstairs on that one at all? Even if they did, I'm not sure they'd have overruled it. It may have even been less than a second, but I think the whistle going off before the puck was tapped in would be enough of an argument that Price and the Habs defenders could have assumed the play was dead and that may have effected the play.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I imagine that's how it would be.  Figured I'd see if there were other opinions on it as well.  What a brutal way to go.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

About Us

This website is NOT associated with the Toronto Maple Leafs or the NHL.


It is operated by Rick Couchman and Jeff Lewis.
Back
Top