by bignick33 on Wed Apr 18, 2012 8:56 pm
PhillyandBCEagles {l Wrote}:claver2010 {l Wrote}:NCAA goalies in these playoffs (real time including tonight) are 8-5, 1.73, .937. Non-NCAA goalies are 17-20, 3.06, .902
How do those numbers look if you take out the 4 who have played (I double-checked on Penguins backup Brent Johnson, he's from Michigan but played in the OHL) in the Flyers-Penguins series?
by eagle9903 on Wed Apr 18, 2012 8:58 pm
bignick33 {l Wrote}:eagle9903 {l Wrote}:bignick33 {l Wrote}:eagle9903 {l Wrote}:flyingelvii {l Wrote}:eagle9903 {l Wrote}:bignick33 {l Wrote}:claver2010 {l Wrote}:Weber say hello to Mr. Shanaban
I don't think supplemental discipline is in order. Although, it was a consummate jackass move and there will probably be retaliation.
Bitz, on the other hand (despite the fans chants of "bullshit" after the penalty was called), should absolutely get suspended.
Not that anyone else cares about this, but Matt Cooke did the exact same thing Zac Rinaldo did in the final game of the regular season. Cooke no penalty, Rinaldo game misconduct.
Sweet.
Both should receive supplemental discipline of death because they both suck at life.
Rinaldo is not Carcillo, he is not anywhere near Cooke. He's been playing pretty disciplined this whole year.
Refire
Poor example. 1) obviously he was instructed to do what he did there, which was obviously a penalty, down 5 with a period left after the goalie switch and timeout, 2) that was high bullshit 2 minutes for cross check, 2 minutes for roughing, 10 minutes misconduct, game misconduct is RIDICULOUS. The flyers and Rinaldo got penalized for the penguins bad acts in game 3.
What annoys me is that you're pulling the "woe is me" that your Flyers brethren always claim the Pens pull (see earlier in this thread). The Flyers are obviously no saints either. And, in a six goal game, the game misconduct is pretty much a given. I can't imagine you disagree with the double-minor part of it.
It is pretty amazing that Cooke hasn't been penalized this series.
PS: Thanks for taking the bait!
by claver2010 on Wed Apr 18, 2012 9:00 pm
by bignick33 on Wed Apr 18, 2012 9:00 pm
by eagle9903 on Wed Apr 18, 2012 9:03 pm
by claver2010 on Wed Apr 18, 2012 9:05 pm
eagle9903 {l Wrote}:Kubina done for the game(10 minute misconduct), Simmonds too
FUCK THE NHL
by bignick33 on Wed Apr 18, 2012 9:05 pm
eagle9903 {l Wrote}:Kubina done for the game(10 minute misconduct), Simmonds too
FUCK THE NHL
by eagle9903 on Wed Apr 18, 2012 9:08 pm
bignick33 {l Wrote}:eagle9903 {l Wrote}:Kubina done for the game(10 minute misconduct), Simmonds too
FUCK THE NHL
Why do you care so much? They matched it up with Cooke and Vitale. You don't think the Flyers have a chance to come back, do you?
by bignick33 on Wed Apr 18, 2012 9:10 pm
eagle9903 {l Wrote}:bignick33 {l Wrote}:eagle9903 {l Wrote}:Kubina done for the game(10 minute misconduct), Simmonds too
FUCK THE NHL
Why do you care so much? They matched it up with Cooke and Vitale. You don't think the Flyers have a chance to come back, do you?
i want to see fights, obviously.
by claver2010 on Wed Apr 18, 2012 9:13 pm
by bignick33 on Wed Apr 18, 2012 9:14 pm
claver2010 {l Wrote}:Nice F bomb, love those sensitive microphones
by flyingelvii on Wed Apr 18, 2012 9:22 pm
by bignick33 on Wed Apr 18, 2012 9:34 pm
by PhillyandBCEagles on Wed Apr 18, 2012 10:15 pm
bignick33 {l Wrote}:PhillyandBCEagles {l Wrote}:claver2010 {l Wrote}:NCAA goalies in these playoffs (real time including tonight) are 8-5, 1.73, .937. Non-NCAA goalies are 17-20, 3.06, .902
How do those numbers look if you take out the 4 who have played (I double-checked on Penguins backup Brent Johnson, he's from Michigan but played in the OHL) in the Flyers-Penguins series?
Why can't your team find a good goalie? Mine has like three of them.
by claver2010 on Thu Apr 19, 2012 7:31 am
bignick33 {l Wrote}:Well, that was a snipe by Turris. Henrik's habit of playing deep really burnt him there.
by claver2010 on Thu Apr 19, 2012 7:52 am
by eagle9903 on Thu Apr 19, 2012 8:24 am
claver2010 {l Wrote}:Apparently Hunter is bitching that the Bs were offsides, didn't notice it at the time. Also according to him, it was the same linesmen as the ones who blew the Briere goal in game 1
by eagle9903 on Thu Apr 19, 2012 8:43 am
flyingelvii {l Wrote}:I have no problem with the misconducts. The game is out of hand and Rinaldo is obviously just trolling. If the refs did that to Neal instead of sending him to the box, a lot of the fights would've been averted. You have to get control of the game and, in turn, get some control of the series back.
by flyingelvii on Thu Apr 19, 2012 8:52 am
claver2010 {l Wrote}:bignick33 {l Wrote}:Well, that was a snipe by Turris. Henrik's habit of playing deep really burnt him there.
First, yeah that was a fucking snipe.
Kreider was placed on the 4th line last night with Rupp & Mitchell. I joked that he played with more offensive skill in 2010-11 at BC than last night (even though Rupp played well).
The announcers hit on it towards the end of the 2nd period but Torts has to trust his 3rd pairing and 4th line a little more. Girardi and McDonaugh were over and close to 20 minutes late in the 2nd and these weren't camping out at the point on the powerplay minutes either -that's unsustainable. I think the 4th line got 2 shifts in the entire 3rd.
BTW I was rooting for Schneider last night.
by flyingelvii on Thu Apr 19, 2012 8:57 am
eagle9903 {l Wrote}:claver2010 {l Wrote}:Apparently Hunter is bitching that the Bs were offsides, didn't notice it at the time. Also according to him, it was the same linesmen as the ones who blew the Briere goal in game 1
and the ones that blew the icing which led to a pig face goal in game 1.
by pick6pedro on Thu Apr 19, 2012 10:35 am
flyingelvii {l Wrote}:eagle9903 {l Wrote}:claver2010 {l Wrote}:Apparently Hunter is bitching that the Bs were offsides, didn't notice it at the time. Also according to him, it was the same linesmen as the ones who blew the Briere goal in game 1
and the ones that blew the icing which led to a pig face goal in game 1.
For such a tough guy, well as tough as you can be when you attack some guy after he scores a goal, Hunter is quite the whiny bitch. Actually, that seems just about right. Maybe they shouldn't have let Seidenberg skate around the offensive zone for 15 seconds. Shit happens and it generally evens out over the course of the series.
by bignick33 on Thu Apr 19, 2012 10:44 am
pick6pedro {l Wrote}:
How is it whining when there is a clear right and wrong and he's right? Yes, these things have a way of evening out, but when one leads directly to a deciding goal, one should just ignore it? Whatever you say...
by eagle9903 on Thu Apr 19, 2012 10:58 am
bignick33 {l Wrote}:pick6pedro {l Wrote}:
How is it whining when there is a clear right and wrong and he's right? Yes, these things have a way of evening out, but when one leads directly to a deciding goal, one should just ignore it? Whatever you say...
I think he was questioning the "directly" part. If he wasn't, then I definitely am. In any event, the line between whining and excuse-making is razor thin.
by pick6pedro on Thu Apr 19, 2012 11:03 am
bignick33 {l Wrote}:pick6pedro {l Wrote}:
How is it whining when there is a clear right and wrong and he's right? Yes, these things have a way of evening out, but when one leads directly to a deciding goal, one should just ignore it? Whatever you say...
I think he was questioning the "directly" part. If he wasn't, then I definitely am. In any event, the line between whining and excuse-making is razor thin.
by bignick33 on Thu Apr 19, 2012 11:11 am
pick6pedro {l Wrote}:bignick33 {l Wrote}:pick6pedro {l Wrote}:
How is it whining when there is a clear right and wrong and he's right? Yes, these things have a way of evening out, but when one leads directly to a deciding goal, one should just ignore it? Whatever you say...
I think he was questioning the "directly" part. If he wasn't, then I definitely am. In any event, the line between whining and excuse-making is razor thin.
As long as the goal/no goal call is not the issue, then technically you're right that it isn't direct. But I'm pretty sure that's obvious to both you and not really the issue here.
I don't see this as the difference between whining and excuse-making. One can bring up factual evidence without doing either. Nothing about the way it was brought up, Hunter's personality, or history of coaching tells me he was bitching about it.
by pick6pedro on Thu Apr 19, 2012 11:24 am
bignick33 {l Wrote}:pick6pedro {l Wrote}:bignick33 {l Wrote}:pick6pedro {l Wrote}:
How is it whining when there is a clear right and wrong and he's right? Yes, these things have a way of evening out, but when one leads directly to a deciding goal, one should just ignore it? Whatever you say...
I think he was questioning the "directly" part. If he wasn't, then I definitely am. In any event, the line between whining and excuse-making is razor thin.
As long as the goal/no goal call is not the issue, then technically you're right that it isn't direct. But I'm pretty sure that's obvious to both you and not really the issue here.
I don't see this as the difference between whining and excuse-making. One can bring up factual evidence without doing either. Nothing about the way it was brought up, Hunter's personality, or history of coaching tells me he was bitching about it.
It would have directly resulted in the goal if it were a pass leading to an odd-man rush. That wasn't the case; the Bruins held the puck in the zone for an extended period time before the shot (and, as elvii mentioned, the entire sequence was poorly defensed by Washington).
by bignick33 on Thu Apr 19, 2012 11:26 am
pick6pedro {l Wrote}:bignick33 {l Wrote}:pick6pedro {l Wrote}:bignick33 {l Wrote}:pick6pedro {l Wrote}:
How is it whining when there is a clear right and wrong and he's right? Yes, these things have a way of evening out, but when one leads directly to a deciding goal, one should just ignore it? Whatever you say...
I think he was questioning the "directly" part. If he wasn't, then I definitely am. In any event, the line between whining and excuse-making is razor thin.
As long as the goal/no goal call is not the issue, then technically you're right that it isn't direct. But I'm pretty sure that's obvious to both you and not really the issue here.
I don't see this as the difference between whining and excuse-making. One can bring up factual evidence without doing either. Nothing about the way it was brought up, Hunter's personality, or history of coaching tells me he was bitching about it.
It would have directly resulted in the goal if it were a pass leading to an odd-man rush. That wasn't the case; the Bruins held the puck in the zone for an extended period time before the shot (and, as elvii mentioned, the entire sequence was poorly defensed by Washington).
So the poorly defensed sequence would have never occured. It's pretty damned direct if the exact possession in that zone would have been cut off. And no just because it dragged and the puck didn't go right at the net doesn't change that.
by pick6pedro on Thu Apr 19, 2012 11:31 am
bignick33 {l Wrote}:pick6pedro {l Wrote}:bignick33 {l Wrote}:pick6pedro {l Wrote}:bignick33 {l Wrote}:pick6pedro {l Wrote}:
How is it whining when there is a clear right and wrong and he's right? Yes, these things have a way of evening out, but when one leads directly to a deciding goal, one should just ignore it? Whatever you say...
I think he was questioning the "directly" part. If he wasn't, then I definitely am. In any event, the line between whining and excuse-making is razor thin.
As long as the goal/no goal call is not the issue, then technically you're right that it isn't direct. But I'm pretty sure that's obvious to both you and not really the issue here.
I don't see this as the difference between whining and excuse-making. One can bring up factual evidence without doing either. Nothing about the way it was brought up, Hunter's personality, or history of coaching tells me he was bitching about it.
It would have directly resulted in the goal if it were a pass leading to an odd-man rush. That wasn't the case; the Bruins held the puck in the zone for an extended period time before the shot (and, as elvii mentioned, the entire sequence was poorly defensed by Washington).
So the poorly defensed sequence would have never occured. It's pretty damned direct if the exact possession in that zone would have been cut off. And no just because it dragged and the puck didn't go right at the net doesn't change that.
And here is where the line is so razor-thin.
by eagle9903 on Thu Apr 19, 2012 11:33 am
bignick33 {l Wrote}:pick6pedro {l Wrote}:bignick33 {l Wrote}:pick6pedro {l Wrote}:bignick33 {l Wrote}:pick6pedro {l Wrote}:
How is it whining when there is a clear right and wrong and he's right? Yes, these things have a way of evening out, but when one leads directly to a deciding goal, one should just ignore it? Whatever you say...
I think he was questioning the "directly" part. If he wasn't, then I definitely am. In any event, the line between whining and excuse-making is razor thin.
As long as the goal/no goal call is not the issue, then technically you're right that it isn't direct. But I'm pretty sure that's obvious to both you and not really the issue here.
I don't see this as the difference between whining and excuse-making. One can bring up factual evidence without doing either. Nothing about the way it was brought up, Hunter's personality, or history of coaching tells me he was bitching about it.
It would have directly resulted in the goal if it were a pass leading to an odd-man rush. That wasn't the case; the Bruins held the puck in the zone for an extended period time before the shot (and, as elvii mentioned, the entire sequence was poorly defensed by Washington).
So the poorly defensed sequence would have never occured. It's pretty damned direct if the exact possession in that zone would have been cut off. And no just because it dragged and the puck didn't go right at the net doesn't change that.
And here is where the line is so razor-thin.
by pick6pedro on Thu Apr 19, 2012 11:39 am
eagle9903 {l Wrote}:bignick33 {l Wrote}:pick6pedro {l Wrote}:bignick33 {l Wrote}:pick6pedro {l Wrote}:bignick33 {l Wrote}:pick6pedro {l Wrote}:
How is it whining when there is a clear right and wrong and he's right? Yes, these things have a way of evening out, but when one leads directly to a deciding goal, one should just ignore it? Whatever you say...
I think he was questioning the "directly" part. If he wasn't, then I definitely am. In any event, the line between whining and excuse-making is razor thin.
As long as the goal/no goal call is not the issue, then technically you're right that it isn't direct. But I'm pretty sure that's obvious to both you and not really the issue here.
I don't see this as the difference between whining and excuse-making. One can bring up factual evidence without doing either. Nothing about the way it was brought up, Hunter's personality, or history of coaching tells me he was bitching about it.
It would have directly resulted in the goal if it were a pass leading to an odd-man rush. That wasn't the case; the Bruins held the puck in the zone for an extended period time before the shot (and, as elvii mentioned, the entire sequence was poorly defensed by Washington).
So the poorly defensed sequence would have never occured. It's pretty damned direct if the exact possession in that zone would have been cut off. And no just because it dragged and the puck didn't go right at the net doesn't change that.
And here is where the line is so razor-thin.
Its also complicated by the fact that if the wronged team had worn white, yellow and black jerseys instead of red white and black the argument sides would be changed. I would of course, still be correct about all things. Also Colin Campbell loves the Bs, conspiracy etc.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 113 guests