Jump to content

Round 2 - Game 1 : Montreal


Recommended Posts

42 minutes ago, Stretch said:

Apparently Scheifele doesn’t plan to appeal. Doesn’t want to be a further distraction.

Probably the best move.  Put the team first.  It's a crappy situation, no point in dragging it out.  Just support the boys and get them focused on kicking this mediocre bunch of Montreal bums to the curb.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Tiny759 said:

Word is Montreal fans were sending hateful messages to his parents because if this hit. I’d be surprised if we hear anything out of Montreal media on this.

I mentioned this to my Habs fan friend and he was "What are you talking about, I just read two articles about his presser this morning. He didn't say anything about that." 

Sent him the NHL.com article and he was shocked at how different the articles written by Toronto based reporters were.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, GCJenks said:

I mentioned this to my Habs fan friend and he was "What are you talking about, I just read two articles about his presser this morning. He didn't say anything about that." 

Sent him the NHL.com article and he was shocked at how different the articles written by Toronto based reporters were.

Selective reporting.  Brutal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, blue_gold_84 said:

Sure... If you completely disregard the fact it wasn't a penalty. There was no charge. The official who called it charging needs to get his eyes checked. Scheifele didn't take three strides and his feet didn't leave the ice prior to contact.

Four games for #55 is yet another bungle by that assclown Parros and the DOPS. I expect Scheifele to appeal it but that still means he sits for at least two games, IMO.

****, the NHL's officiating and disciplinary systems are a disgrace.

The wording of the rule explaining charging says absolutely nothing about strides (any number, not even the magic 3) or feet leaving the ice. Those are all myths and interpretations made up by broadcasters who don’t know the rule book (that includes level 5 ref Ron McLean). The simple wording is “as a result of distance travelled, shall violently check an opponent in any manner”. The rule book goes on to say that this can happen anywhere, open ice, into the boards or into the goal. Furthermore, if an injury occurs, the penalty is automatically a game misconduct where a major was called, and supplementary discipline can be warranted. There is also a section about intent to injure and majors and misconducts being called there, but this is an instance expressly written in the rule book where consequence will be factored in regardless of intent. By definition, this was textbook charging- contact point to body or head, strides, or intent does not matter. All that would have factored in to the suspension angle and it’s clear they did not buy Scheifele’s explanation. I disagree with the “correctness” of the 4 games given based on all the weak precedents for other stuff, but I would sadly say this is the “right” call based on the injury. I don’t like the inconsistency from DOPS, or the face that they penalize a hockey play that was excessive while turning a blind eye to all the cheap nonsense between the whistles. Flag Chariot for slashing Hellebuyck’s glove with the puck in it, head locking Scheifele and ripping his helmet off, slashing him and then only catching the retaliation, any number of Perry face washes, or Morrissey throwing a half check 2 seconds after the end of period horn sounded. Toss players for that cheap garbage and then the stars won’t look to light up a pest with his head down. But a former goon leading player safety will usually protect those like-minded pests and enforcers because he sees their role as valuable (a.k.a. There is a place in the game for them because they aren’t good enough to stay on the league on skill alone - just like Parros himself wasn’t). 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, FrostyWinnipeg said:

The Jets are so boring my TV just asked me if I was still watching.

 

Our most offensive player of the game? Connor...Connor Hellebuyck,

Yes I've had dentist appointments that were more fun than watching Game 2.  What a yawn-fest.  I painted a wall by my TV and watched it dry during the game and that was more interesting....Jets got to kick it up a notch.  They're just letting Montreal take away all their offensive jam.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, kelownabomberfan said:

Yes I've had dentist appointments that were more fun than watching Game 2.  What a yawn-fest.  I painted a wall by my TV and watched it dry during the game and that was more interesting....Jets got to kick it up a notch.  They're just letting Montreal take away all their offensive jam.

I was surprised near shocked to see Sean Reynolds liking this game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2021-06-04 at 8:52 AM, blue_gold_84 said:

Sure... If you completely disregard the fact it wasn't a penalty. There was no charge. The official who called it charging needs to get his eyes checked. Scheifele didn't take three strides and his feet didn't leave the ice prior to contact.

Four games for #55 is yet another bungle by that assclown Parros and the DOPS. I expect Scheifele to appeal it but that still means he sits for at least two games, IMO.

****, the NHL's officiating and disciplinary systems are a disgrace.

Yeah well it was not the hit but the timing of it...the puck was in the net he didn't even try to  reach out with his stick it just looked terrible and it was stupid thing by our supposedly best player. But it looks like he won't have to worry about coming back into this series. As a leader you have to be smarter....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...