8
|
|
Post by mikeveisor on Apr 15, 2024 6:25:20 GMT -6
That’s offside. “They have views we don’t have “ Joke. I know what I saw. The replay they showed on the Jumbotron left it unclear on the offside call in house - Hi-Def is still hard to discern from the 2nd balcony. But I know what I saw and that was a Hurricane interfering with and impeding a Hawk defender. Game was not decided on that call but I remember the days where we got those calls, and when we didn’t, we overcame it. Going to be fun seeing what happens this summer. |
|
|
|
Post by tincup on Apr 15, 2024 7:44:06 GMT -6
That’s offside. “They have views we don’t have “ Joke. I know what I saw. The replay they showed on the Jumbotron left it unclear on the offside call in house - Hi-Def is still hard to discern from the 2nd balcony. But I know what I saw and that was a Hurricane interfering with and impeding a Hawk defender. Game was not decided on that call but I remember the days where we got those calls, and when we didn’t, we overcame it. Going to be fun seeing what happens this summer. Good teams get calls, no doubt. At least the officials didn’t fret over it for 15 minutes. In a bigger game they might have. |
|
|
|
Post by jacksalmon on Apr 15, 2024 8:07:46 GMT -6
Nazar is on pace for 82 goals next year. Good start for him. Hope he will be able to score many more next year. The team will desperately need them. |
|
|
|
Post by romonadropout on Apr 15, 2024 13:28:29 GMT -6
That’s offside. “They have views we don’t have “ Joke. I know what I saw. The replay they showed on the Jumbotron left it unclear on the offside call in house - Hi-Def is still hard to discern from the 2nd balcony. But I know what I saw and that was a Hurricane interfering with and impeding a Hawk defender. Game was not decided on that call but I remember the days where we got those calls, and when we didn’t, we overcame it. Going to be fun seeing what happens this summer. Just my two cents..... The play looked On Sides to me. While the puck did completely cross over the line while the Cane's player's skate was still in the zone, the puck carrier didn't touch the puck until his teammate's skate hit the blue line - essentially tagging up. So I think it was a good call, a bad challenge and terrible analysis by Grimson. That's my story and I'm sticking to it..... |
|
|
|
Post by galaxytrash on Apr 15, 2024 13:42:10 GMT -6
The replay they showed on the Jumbotron left it unclear on the offside call in house - Hi-Def is still hard to discern from the 2nd balcony. But I know what I saw and that was a Hurricane interfering with and impeding a Hawk defender. Game was not decided on that call but I remember the days where we got those calls, and when we didn’t, we overcame it. Going to be fun seeing what happens this summer. Just my two cents..... The play looked On Sides to me. While the puck did completely cross over the line while the Cane's player's skate was still in the zone, the puck carrier didn't touch the puck until his teammate's skate hit the blue line - essentially tagging up. So I think it was a good call, a bad challenge and terrible analysis by Grimson. That's my story and I'm sticking to it..... i got no problem with the challenge at all. the goal put us down 2 late...an almost insurmountable lead at that point in the game especially with our squad. i thought the play could've been onside. seemed to me that cane player might have just got the toe of his skate onto the line before the puck fully crossed. to me it was definitely worth the gamble at the time. |
|
|
|
Post by romonadropout on Apr 15, 2024 15:36:17 GMT -6
Just my two cents..... The play looked On Sides to me. While the puck did completely cross over the line while the Cane's player's skate was still in the zone, the puck carrier didn't touch the puck until his teammate's skate hit the blue line - essentially tagging up. So I think it was a good call, a bad challenge and terrible analysis by Grimson. That's my story and I'm sticking to it..... i got no problem with the challenge at all. the goal put us down 2 late...an almost insurmountable lead at that point in the game especially with our squad. i thought the play could've been onside. seemed to me that cane player might have just got the toe of his skate onto the line before the puck fully crossed. to me it was definitely worth the gamble at the time. I don't disagree that under the circumstances, there was not much to lose. I say it was a bad challenge because objectively speaking, it was destine to fail. To reiterate.... I don't think the play was on sides because his toe was on the line before the puck fully crossed it.... He was definitely off-sides at that moment, and the replay showed it. But the next frame of that same replay showed his skate making contact with the line, while his teammate had yet to touch the puck - negating the off-sides. I guess the reason I'm beating a dead horse here, is that our professional announcer and fill-in analyist, both of whom I find uber annoying - tried to sell this as a missed call and "A bad break for the Hawks"..... which it clearly wasn't...  |
|
|
|
Post by mikeveisor on Apr 15, 2024 17:14:55 GMT -6
i got no problem with the challenge at all. the goal put us down 2 late...an almost insurmountable lead at that point in the game especially with our squad. i thought the play could've been onside. seemed to me that cane player might have just got the toe of his skate onto the line before the puck fully crossed. to me it was definitely worth the gamble at the time. I don't disagree that under the circumstances, there was not much to lose. I say it was a bad challenge because objectively speaking, it was destine to fail. To reiterate.... I don't think the play was on sides because his toe was on the line before the puck fully crossed it.... He was definitely off-sides at that moment, and the replay showed it. But the next frame of that same replay showed his skate making contact with the line, while his teammate had yet to touch the puck - negating the off-sides. I guess the reason I'm beating a dead horse here, is that our professional announcer and fill-in analyist, both of whom I find uber annoying - tried to sell this as a missed call and "A bad break for the Hawks"..... which it clearly wasn't... Not sure who the defender was but there's interference penalty I saw on the same play from the reverse angle. |
|
|
|
Post by romonadropout on Apr 15, 2024 18:11:59 GMT -6
I don't disagree that under the circumstances, there was not much to lose. I say it was a bad challenge because objectively speaking, it was destine to fail. To reiterate.... I don't think the play was on sides because his toe was on the line before the puck fully crossed it.... He was definitely off-sides at that moment, and the replay showed it. But the next frame of that same replay showed his skate making contact with the line, while his teammate had yet to touch the puck - negating the off-sides. I guess the reason I'm beating a dead horse here, is that our professional announcer and fill-in analyist, both of whom I find uber annoying - tried to sell this as a missed call and "A bad break for the Hawks"..... which it clearly wasn't... Not sure who the defender was but there's interference penalty I saw on the same play from the reverse angle. As long as they were in Nothing-to-Lose Mode...... maybe they should have challenged for a Missed Stoppage ??  |
|
