Jump to content

Round 3, Game 5: Montreal Canadiens @ Golden Knights


Recommended Posts

8 minutes ago, Fanpuck33 said:

 

I get wanting to make sure you get head shot calls right, even all majors. But when blood is the only reason you can review a call? Asinine.  If you can't review a basic high stick, then you should only be able to take away the double away and still leave it as a minor.

 

GOAL CAUFIELD!

 

Its not the blood that can be reviewed, its that it was a high stick with blood = double minor, and that is what made it reviewable.  On the review they determined it was a follow through of a shot so it wasn't penalty at all.  

 

In a stupid sense, it was sort of a rookie mistake for kk to show that he was bleeding.  i.e. they would have got an unreviewable 2 min PP had he lied about it.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, alfredoh2009 said:

I am very impressed by the team effort 

 

also, seems like Suzuki’s and Kotkaniemi’s development is just fine :) 

Oh ya ..and how!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Sir_Boagalott said:

Its not the blood that can be reviewed, its that it was a high stick with blood = double minor, and that is what made it reviewable.  On the review they determined it was a follow through of a shot so it wasn't penalty at all. 

 

The blood is the only thing that made it a double minor, so the blood is the reason it was reviewable. That was the point I was trying to make.

 

Let's kill this now. Don't give them any momentum.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Sir_Boagalott said:

In a stupid sense, it was sort of a rookie mistake for kk to show that he was bleeding.  i.e. they would have got an unreviewable 2 min PP had he lied about it.  

Yeah. But pumped full of adrenaline, hit with a high stick and spotting blood, I'm not surprised that a young player doesn't make the connection.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, tomh009 said:

Yeah. But pumped full of adrenaline, hit with a high stick and spotting blood, I'm not surprised that a young player doesn't make the connection.

 

Exactly, its not like kk can be faulted for it.   It was a unusual situation where you actually don't want to be bleeding.   However, if that had happened to Perry or Staal they likely would have been aware of the rule and try to hide the blood.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3-“0 after two 

 

no one could have predicted such a great playoff run by the Habs 

 

now, it’s time to finish the job. 
 

Go Habs Go!!!

 

show the hockey world how well you were put together for the playoffs 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, TurdBurglar said:

The 2 best games Montreal has played this series and they are back-to-back.  Barring a miracle, I would be real worried if I were Vegas going into Montreal Thursday.

Let’s win this one first but yeah! Absolutely 

Edited by alfredoh2009
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Habs' game plan of getting in front of Fleury -- I do assume that's their plan -- is working. They're getting shots up close, and they have three goals. High-danger chances now tied with Vegas, but, hey, Price is Right!

 

image.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, TurdBurglar said:

The 2 best games Montreal has played this series and they are back-to-back.  Barring a miracle, I would be real worried if I were Vegas going into Montreal Thursday.

Ya man.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, tomh009 said:

Three goals sounds like a lovely number!

That is all i had asked for,.

 

Will it be sit back, 1 guy forecheckin and defend defend defend right from drop of puck?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, Fanpuck33 said:

I get wanting to make sure you get head shot calls right, even all majors. But when blood is the only reason you can review a call? Asinine.  If you can't review a basic high stick, then you should only be able to take away the double away and still leave it as a minor.

 

That's what it is for majors.  It's reviewable but it can only go down to a minor; it can't come off the board entirely.  If you put that in for a double-minor though, what about a friendly fire incident?  (That's one of the reasons this rule is in there.)  By having it that a penalty can't come off the board entirely, a team could still be penalized after review for a high stick that they didn't commit.

 

23 minutes ago, sbhatt said:

RUN.  IT. UP.

 

I don't want to see even a HINT of 'playing to protect the lead'.  Let's break these guys mentally.  Let's get 4+ past Fleury and put a goaltending controversy into their heads.  Let's go back to Montreal with swagger to spare.

 

I get the logic behind it and I agree to an extent but if they pop another couple of goals past Fleury, they go back to Lehner for Game 6.  We don't want them to go back to Lehner.  If Fleury has a good third period, maybe they stick with him.  Maybe it makes the decision harder on DeBoer.  (But if they pop a couple more, I'm not going to complain...)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Commandant said:

Game 5 and all the Habs hitting has had an effect, Vegas seems slower. Happened late in the series to the Leafs too.

 

Agreed. This is a big reason I think people were underestimating Josh Anderson's production.  In the regular season, his physical game isn't as big a factor when he isn't producing offensively. But in a 7 game series? He wears people down. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...