Thread: 18/19 NHL Thread

Reminds me of Game 6 of the 1985 World Series. The Cardinals were just outs away from winning the title when Don Denkinger made a horrible "safe" call at first base. The Royals then went on to win the game and win Game 7 the next night. What really happened is that the Cardinals were so miffed at the bad call, they became totally unglued and it snowballed from there. Was the major a bad call? Debatable. But there's no excuse to suddenly allow four goals in five minutes despite being a man down. Vegas was so miffed at the unfortunate call that they lost composure and stopped playing hockey. They had the excuse to feel sorry for themselves rather than growing an extra nut and winning despite the bad call. Vegas is a young team and they surely needed somebody to tell them to bear down and overcome the bad break.

Speaking of breaks, the Avs now get another one.

Originally Posted by Northman

He probably will miss at least one game, that has to be a concussion of sorts no?

I've heard reports that he does indeed have a concussion and will miss 7 days minimum. All unconfirmed of course.

Originally Posted by Hawgdriver

It was. Pavelski landed square on his nugget after colliding with two Vegas guys. It looked more awkward than anything, but I'll defer to the veteran skaters...

Seems more reactionary than anything, which is what I think most people were ticked about (since no call was made on the ice immediately). But the rules do give discretion to the refs for assessing a minor or major for that. They assigned a major, then Vegas decided to do snow angels in the full on defecation of their penalty kill...

Brutal. I don't think, personally, a major should've been assessed. A bit much. Yeah, he was cross-checked off the faceoff but Stastny's collision with him was completely coincidental and that's what knocked him to the ice.

Because of the blood and severity I see why they called it the way they did. Really though, it was not malicious. The cross off the faceoff sent him off balance. Of course your going to give a guy a nudge when he is wobbly and take him out of the play. Or at least ensure he is out of the play, but there was nothing bad there. He did not force him to the ice, or slam him, or anything like that. Just helped him down a tad. 99% of the the time they guy does not smack his head and 99% of the time the guy gets right back up and chases the play down.

Again, which is more egregious? The call, or Vegas allowing 4 goals in 4 minutes right after.

Take a ******* time out Gallant!

Originally Posted by underrated29

Because of the blood and severity I see why they called it the way they did. Really though, it was not malicious. The cross off the faceoff sent him off balance. Of course your going to give a guy a nudge when he is wobbly and take him out of the play. Or at least ensure he is out of the play, but there was nothing bad there. He did not force him to the ice, or slam him, or anything like that. Just helped him down a tad. 99% of the the time they guy does not smack his head and 99% of the time the guy gets right back up and chases the play down.

Pavelski took a shot to the mouth earlier in the series. Did the assess the guy who shot the puck a game misconduct?

Originally Posted by wayninja

Again, which is more egregious? The call, or Vegas allowing 4 goals in 4 minutes right after.

Take a ******* time out Gallant!

Yeah...but that shit happens on a five minute power play when the team on the PP is jacked up on Mountain Dew after watching their captain get his nugget split open.

Originally Posted by SR

Yeah...but that shit happens on a five minute power play when the team on the PP is jacked up on Mountain Dew after watching their captain get his nugget split open.

Agreed, as soon as Couture (I think it was him) put the first one in and raised that "that's one!" finger to his team, Gallant should have taken a timeout to settle his team down. He literally did the opposite in arguing that he specifically was NOT taking a timeout.

Originally Posted by SR

Pavelski took a shot to the mouth earlier in the series. Did the assess the guy who shot the puck a game misconduct?

I dont know cuz I didnt see it, but you play or played hockey. You know shooting a puck and hitting anyone in the face is not a penalty unless you intentionally try and hit the guy.

Originally Posted by underrated29

I dont know cuz I didnt see it, but you play or played hockey. You know shooting a puck and hitting anyone in the face is not a penalty unless you intentionally try and hit the guy.

Pavelski took a slapshot to the mouth. It knocked out several teeth, sheared and cracked others. That's why he was wearing the clear shield over his jaw.

My point is this: the shot to the mouth was incidental. Shit happens. The Vegas player was issued a game misconduct because he cross checked Pavelski in the faceoff circle while Pavelski was off-balance, at which time Paul Stastny hit Pavelski knocking him to the ice head-first. Call the two-minute cross-check penalty...fine. The game misconduct call was a complete overreaction by the ref in my opinion.

If a player plays the puck with a high stick in the offensive zone and the puck hits another player in the face, knocking his teeth out, do you think there would be any additional penalties called? No. Play would be stopped, the faceoff would be moved outside of the offensive zone, and the game goes on.

If a goalie shoots the puck over the glass and lets go of his stick accidentally at the same time while said stick hits a player in the face, does the goalie get a penalty for that too? No. He gets a two-minute delay of game penalty for shooting the puck over the glass and the game goes on.

Overreaction or not it was a gruesome scene and i think that is what tilted the decision. I do find it interesting that when it comes to the NFL they continue to try to do anything to make the game safer but hockey still remains one of the more brutal sports that still endorses actual fighting. Even with all that Vegas still allowed 4 goals, you just cant do that no matter the length of the penalty.

Originally Posted by SR

Pavelski took a slapshot to the mouth. It knocked out several teeth, sheared and cracked others. That's why he was wearing the clear shield over his jaw.

My point is this: the shot to the mouth was incidental. Shit happens. The Vegas player was issued a game misconduct because he cross checked Pavelski in the faceoff circle while Pavelski was off-balance, at which time Paul Stastny hit Pavelski knocking him to the ice head-first. Call the two-minute cross-check penalty...fine. The game misconduct call was a complete overreaction by the ref in my opinion.

If a player plays the puck with a high stick in the offensive zone and the puck hits another player in the face, knocking his teeth out, do you think there would be any additional penalties called? No. Play would be stopped, the faceoff would be moved outside of the offensive zone, and the game goes on.

If a goalie shoots the puck over the glass and lets go of his stick accidentally at the same time while said stick hits a player in the face, does the goalie get a penalty for that too? No. He gets a two-minute delay of game penalty for shooting the puck over the glass and the game goes on.

Yes, I agree. Did you read my post at all? Cuz we are saying the same thing.

The only argument I would make here is that the way most penalties are written in the NHL rulebook, the refs have discretion to call majors or minors as they see fit.

I think most people would argue that this SHOULD NOT have been called a major, but it's not like this was some flat out disregarding of the rules as some folks (not on here) are calling it.

Originally Posted by Northman

Overreaction or not it was a gruesome scene and i think that is what tilted the decision. I do find it interesting that when it comes to the NFL they continue to try to do anything to make the game safer but hockey still remains one of the more brutal sports that still endorses actual fighting. Even with all that Vegas still allowed 4 goals, you just cant do that no matter the length of the penalty.

The NHL does not "endorse fighting". Fighting has been virtually phased out of the game if you compare what it was in the late 90s/early 2000s to now.

Vegas allowed four goals on a POWER PLAY that should've never happened.