EHM The Blue Line

OOh...linking to a thread like that? from that? BANNINATED

B. Stinson wrote:

bruins72 wrote:Interesting! If he does move them, do you think he'd trade them as a package? And to what team?

Ugh... I'm staying out of this conversation.

I've seen too much of it in the past.

Eeek! Let's forget we ever mentioned it...

and now I reveal myself as 'thecoolstuff'..


hehe...just kidding

But wow...guy couldn't get it through his head (on both issues)

It was that stupid I thought he's joking the first 3 times I read it. I'm still not sure he was being serious.

Sadly, I think he was dead serious.

And I know he was.

I was in on that conversation way back then. I used to egg thecoolstuff on

My quote to keep that ball rolling:

Henrik without Daniel is like peanut butter without jelly.

Ahh, that was fun!

Yeah Gee thanks timmy_t.

Flyers take game 1 against (censored) with a score of 3-1.

Of course, that's counting only the legal goals. Not the one that (censored) scored with a high-stick, and the one from a legal hit being called.

Fantastic refereeing, as only the NHL can afford to provide.

P.S. Hope they enjoy their completely undeserving win...

Now-Now Flyers Fan ...

The referees were fair in your last series, right?

Tonight wasn't about fairness. It's about knowing the rules they're enforcing.

It's inconceivable that a visible high-stick goal is allowed to stand, even after about 5-10 minutes of video review... absolutely inconceivable. And if they claim it was "inconclusive", perhaps they should call me next time - my TV showed it very clearly.

Then there was the "trip" called on Richards, which lead to the game-tying goal with about 20-something seconds left. Quite an amazing "trip" considering it was a weak shoulder-to-ribs check. Something that happens every night in hockey.

And it's not even about the victim teams. (The other team) had a couple weak calls against them, too. Fortunately for them, they weren't as bad, and didn't lead to any goals against.

I think we (as hockey fans) could always find stuff to complain about. I complain all the time but Gary Bettman never listens to me.

I didn't see the angle you saw on the high-stick goal, I was watching the VS. game. I'm sure you're right about the calls being unfair, I was just kidding.

Hopefully your team will rally for game 2.

From a neutral point of view...

CBC showed several close ups from various angles, something other feeds might not have had, it's inconclusive. I recorded the game actually. You can skip to the replay, stop the video and go frame by frame from there but it becomes too blurry to see which part of the stick made contact. Top of the blade was above the bar but you just cannot convince me you can clearly see he puts it in with the top of his blade.

The trip is pretty obvious. Knee on knee initiated by Richards. Dumb play really. It was the first time in his career Kovalev drew a penalty without diving.

Did not see either game. darn I hate Little League sometimes. So I will only say...CAREY "HEX" Price......[HEX HEX HEX].......rules....I love Price, Habs win cup...


HEX HEX HEX

Danny wrote:From a neutral point of view...

CBC showed several close ups from various angles, something other feeds might not have had, it's inconclusive. I recorded the game actually. You can skip to the replay, stop the video and go frame by frame from there but it becomes too blurry to see which part of the stick made contact. Top of the blade was above the bar but you just cannot convince me you can clearly see he puts it in with the top of his blade.

The trip is pretty obvious. Knee on knee initiated by Richards. Dumb play really. It was the first time in his career Kovalev drew a penalty without diving.

I can only disagree.

The high stick is blatantly obvious if logic is introduced. His blade was stopped by the top of the crossbar - this was clearly shown. His stick was also moving in a downward motion - this was clear. And his blade did make contact with the puck, as shown from the cam. behind the net. Therefore, if his stick was moving down and ended up on the crossbar, it had to have begun it's swing above it. And since he did make contact with the puck with his swing, the contact had to have happened between the beginning of the swing and the end of the swing - all of which was above the bar. No goal.

And the Richards penalty is even more obvious. I'm kind of surprised someone who saw it is saying it was knee-to-knee. This one was so obviously a shoulder-to-ribs hit that no replay was needed to realise it.

But oh well... damage is already done.

The high stick is blatantly obvious if logic is introduced.

I think the evidence to overturn the call on the ice has to be 100% conclusive. That being said, if the call on the ice was "No Goal - touched with a high stick," they would not have been able to reverse it with the video from the game.

(BTW, I saw the goal now)

I think the evidence to overturn the call on the ice has to be 100% conclusive.

I know, and that's why I'm so stunned. - Putting together all the angles available, it is 100% conclusive.

I guess what I mean is "one" conclusive view.

Apparently Johan Franzen is a superstar. Or is he the next Chris Kontos/John Druce.

What a game! What a playoff!

B. Stinson wrote:Tonight wasn't about fairness. It's about knowing the rules they're enforcing.

It's inconceivable that a visible high-stick goal is allowed to stand, even after about 5-10 minutes of video review... absolutely inconceivable. And if they claim it was "inconclusive", perhaps they should call me next time - my TV showed it very clearly.

Then there was the "trip" called on Richards, which lead to the game-tying goal with about 20-something seconds left. Quite an amazing "trip" considering it was a weak shoulder-to-ribs check. Something that happens every night in hockey.

And it's not even about the victim teams. (The other team) had a couple weak calls against them, too. Fortunately for them, they weren't as bad, and didn't lead to any goals against.

I think those who saw the replay of Kovalev "high-stick" goal would agree with you.I'm not talking about philly-fans,but everyone who has watched hockey game even once.. it was a high-stick,play should've been stopped..

And the third goal...well...I don't think it was easy for Carter to win the draw with his broken stick...especially against guy like Koivu.
But anyway,game is 3-1 now..no glutch goals yet...and Biron standing on his head tonight..
Philly deserves to go homearena with series tied..

About Franzen...how the hell he's become a goal scorer like this?I mean after the regular season he had..not too fancy.
As I understood he plays on Holmstrom's place?Hard job for Babcock to pick between two of them next season or these playoffs if tomas's back...but yea,awesome game tonight,from red wings and johan,way to go!

I can't stand the guy but you hate to see something like this happen to anybody...

Avery taken to hospital in cardiac arrest.

Not sure about that. I just heard on the radio that he was rushed to hospital last nite with a lacerated spleen. Either way, real bad news for the guy.

Yeah, TSN is reporting it's a lacerated spleen. Maybe the cardiac arrest was caused by that? Either way, I hope he's okay.

Hmm...Too bad for the Rangers...Hope he'll be fine,hate when these things happens.But that's hockey.
Lost also Drury in the same game..ouch.

Well good luck in winning the next 4 games