Jump to content

Game #25 - 12/5/22 Habs v.s. Canuckleheads


 Share

Recommended Posts

11 hours ago, xXx..CK..xXx said:

Not victim blaming but he has to keep his head up a little more and anticipate that other people are out there trying to hit him. It’s been a few times now where similar hits have happened to Slaf. Anderson was skating the same path just before and I was thinking to myself what if someone were to hit him as he streaked behind the net, but he had his head up the whole time and maintained his speed. A few seconds later, bam, the hit on Slaf. 


He does continue to put himself in vulnerable positions be it along boards or cutting into middle.

I’m happy and amazed he was able to get himself up and wasn’t held out for rest of game but he does need to learn some self-preservation skills.

This time it was a dirty, late hit but he has been caught with solid, clean hits too often for my liking as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

At least St Louis & crew seemingly seems to have things in hand and gotta like the message.

 

https://www.sportsnet.ca/nhl/article/st-louis-keeps-things-in-perspective-after-canadiens-blow-four-goal-lead/

 

"But, as he said, St. Louis never lost his composure.

“The coaches aren’t really ones to scream or yell on the bench,” Harris added, “but there’s a certain level and standard they expect, and that’s how it should be.”

St. Louis will address all of it with the Canadiens before they take to the ice on Tuesday, about how they need to be more consistent in every area of the ice.

But the message will continue to be about building.

“Our good was really good tonight, and we’ll just try to focus on that,” St. Louis said.

Practice will be about cleaning up the bad."

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Commandant said:

Harris had a 72 xG% on the night, a fantastic number and the best of either team.

 

He also had 2 assists.

 

HOW DO YOU THINK THIS IS A GAME THAT MEANS HE SHOULD BE SENT DOWN?

 

I'm not sure we are watching the same game.

 

This was Harris' best game all year.

 

 

 

 

Sure, if you only look at advanced stats.  I’m not sure we were watching the same game either.  He was responsible for 2 goals against off the top of my head.  Sure, he had 2 assists, if Montembeault had 6 assists, it wouldn’t mean he was the best player on either team.  
 

Forgive me if I believe a defenseman should be weighted more on defensive metrics rather than offensive ones.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, The Chicoutimi Cucumber said:

 

Good Lord, I sure did. Up there in the nose-bleeds, surrounded by red sweaters, watching that madness unfold as two dubious teams basically played road hockey. Yowza!

 

I was so happy when Caufield scored that opening goal. He was on my side of the rink, so I had a direct line of sight to witness first-hand what may become one of the iconic sights of the next decade of Habs' history, i.e., Caufield blasting one in from the left hashmarks. 

 

This is a game that defied rational analysis. Complete carnage out there. However, it was interesting to see the Habs live, something I haven't done since well before Covid.

 

Random observations:

 

  • Habs made a LOT of "young team" mistakes. I mean things like pointless icings, where you miscalculate where you're shooting the puck from so it crosses multiple lines; multiple breakdowns on the same play; sloppy plays around the team's blueline to fumble a clearing pass; that sort of thing. They also fell down a lot at key moments (my God, Mattheson in OT was comically brutal), which may have had to do with the ice, I dunno. 
  • Anderson is a better player live than on TV. He does a lot of positional and physical things out there that you don't necessarily notice on the telecast. A tough player to play against. I guarantee you his teammates love what he brings, and opponents hate him, even if fans don't always appreciate it.
  • Dach looked very strong on his skates, an impressive-looking player.
  • Edmundson looked just terrible for much of the night. Sort of Anderson in reverse - a guy who seems to be a lot worse live than on the broadcast. Ugh. Or maybe he just had a bad game. But watching him caused me to rethink my previously-staunch belief in his value.
  • I enjoyed the running commentary from the Habs fans around me. One pointed out that Armia never, ever shoots. A pertinent observation, even if the Armia line was fairly strong on the forecheck much of the night. He also poked holes in Evans's game. Evans was a mixed bag for sure.  He shouldn't be expected to play too many minutes.
  • Slaf: I was relieved he wasn't injured on the hit. He plays the game in an "aw shucks" way that may just be part of who he is as a player, but he worries me. He does some good things, is strong and a good skater, but (1) I don't think he protects himself properly - he's already suffered 3 or 4 explosive hits this season, and I would expect that eventually he will suffer serious injury; and (2) he has that early Kotkaniemi "gee, I'm just happy to be here" vibe where he doesn't seem to feel a need to drive anything or impose himself on the game. Understandable, but I don't want that settling in as a habit for him. It's something I've seen from too many Habs prospects over the years - and when they wake up 3-4 years later and realize they're expected to manufacture things, it's often too late to flip the switch. For both reasons, he should be down in Laval: learning to play with his head up and anticipate being a target in the North American environment, and learning to be the take-charge guy who drives a team. I do not understand what the Habs are doing with him.

I wore the Doug Harvey last night. Ironically, that game was the antithesis of what I understand Doug Harvey's play to be, i.e., cerebral, controlling, masterful. Oh well. One thing these young Habs are is never boring!

 

  


Good points, and completely agree about the differences one can notice watching live versus on tv.

Being able to see the entire ice, watch plays develop, watch how players breakup plays positionally, and the high intensity/speed are some common things for me to still need a live game to fully appreciate. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, TurdBurglar said:

Sure, if you only look at advanced stats.  I’m not sure we were watching the same game either.  He was responsible for 2 goals against off the top of my head.  Sure, he had 2 assists, if Montembeault had 6 assists, it wouldn’t mean he was the best player on either team.  
 

Forgive me if I believe a defenseman should be weighted more on defensive metrics rather than offensive ones.  


Good point, and defensive strategies are proven to be effective, which is why most teams focus on not allowing more than 2 goals when they win.

With the relatively recent shift in style of popular defender (mobile, “puck mover”) it will be interesting to see if average scores , goals per game trend up in coming 3-4 seasons.


I want Harris to get those two assists, but also be minimum +2 at end of game, not hear his name mentioned related to give aways, icings, poor pinches.

He is going to be very good and am not complaining at this point, just have high (unrealistic? ) hopes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, DON said:

At least St Louis & crew seemingly seems to have things in hand and gotta like the message.

 

https://www.sportsnet.ca/nhl/article/st-louis-keeps-things-in-perspective-after-canadiens-blow-four-goal-lead/

 

"But, as he said, St. Louis never lost his composure.

“The coaches aren’t really ones to scream or yell on the bench,” Harris added, “but there’s a certain level and standard they expect, and that’s how it should be.”

St. Louis will address all of it with the Canadiens before they take to the ice on Tuesday, about how they need to be more consistent in every area of the ice.

But the message will continue to be about building.

“Our good was really good tonight, and we’ll just try to focus on that,” St. Louis said.

Practice will be about cleaning up the bad."

 

 

By all accounts St Louis seems to be great with handling the players, which is partly why I shouldn’t complain of his decisions.    I like his mindset of minimizing the bad, elevating the floor while praising the good.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Have to comment after reading post game article on main page.

Honourable mention for Monty giving up 7 and taking the L?

I get that he had great moments, but even his stats were poo.

Just drop the honourable mention on a night like that. I’m  not sure I can get behind the moral victory of that decision, otherwise was a decent write up.

 

Dont think Monty deserves any of the hate in this thread tho either. Poor team défense and bad luck had more to do with it than his play, which is only reason Habs had a lead and weren’t blown out early so he deserves some credit.  Not this  crap about him regressing, sucking, blah blah.

A lot of comments all too happy and too quick to say he is shitting the bed.   He may end up regressing to career averages but too early to call that and he is giving team chance to compete.

 

Edit to add I was adamantly against keeping Monty in the fold before the season and have never been a fan of his, but am happy to be wrong so far this season and don’t mind recognizing his overall strong play.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, TurdBurglar said:

Sure, if you only look at advanced stats.  I’m not sure we were watching the same game either.  He was responsible for 2 goals against off the top of my head.  Sure, he had 2 assists, if Montembeault had 6 assists, it wouldn’t mean he was the best player on either team.  
 

Forgive me if I believe a defenseman should be weighted more on defensive metrics rather than offensive ones.  

 

xGF% isn't an offensive metric.   You really should look into it before declaring that a defenceman should be "weighted more on defensive metrics rather than offensive ones."  This sentence tells me that you don't even understand the statistic.

 

Its a metric that includes both offence and defence.  Its a balance. In short, if you are at 50% that means the number of good scoring chances that happened when you are on the ice is equal to the number of good chances against.  At nearly 75% he is at a ratio where the Habs had 3 quality scoring chances for, for every one against, while he was on the ice.  I'll take that every day of the week and every game of the year.  And no, not each chance is treated equally, its more than that and also factors in the quality of the chances.

 

Kovacevic and Edmundson were both brutal last night....  including Kovacevic taking a brutal penalty in the last 2 minutes. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, hockeyrealist said:

Have to comment after reading post game article on main page.

Honourable mention for Monty giving up 7 and taking the L?

I get that he had great moments, but even his stats were poo.

Just drop the honourable mention on a night like that. I’m  not sure I can get behind the moral victory of that decision, otherwise was a decent write up.

 

Dont think Monty deserves any of the hate in this thread tho either. Poor team défense and bad luck had more to do with it than his play, which is only reason Habs had a lead and weren’t blown out early so he deserves some credit.  Not this  crap about him regressing, sucking, blah blah.

A lot of comments all too happy and too quick to say he is shitting the bed.   He may end up regressing to career averages but too early to call that and he is giving team chance to compete.

 

Edit to add I was adamantly against keeping Monty in the fold before the season and have never been a fan of his, but am happy to be wrong so far this season and don’t mind recognizing his overall strong play.

 

Monty was bad.  It wasn't bad luck when he gave the puck away for the 5th goal... thats completely on him. 

The OT goal is a simple jam play that went right through him.  An NHL goalie has to stop that. 

 

If a goalie gives up two bad goals in the same game, I call that a bad game.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, hockeyrealist said:


Good point, and defensive strategies are proven to be effective, which is why most teams focus on not allowing more than 2 goals when they win.

With the relatively recent shift in style of popular defender (mobile, “puck mover”) it will be interesting to see if average scores , goals per game trend up in coming 3-4 seasons.


I want Harris to get those two assists, but also be minimum +2 at end of game, not hear his name mentioned related to give aways, icings, poor pinches.

He is going to be very good and am not complaining at this point, just have high (unrealistic? ) hopes.

 

Every defenceman in the NHL makes mistakes.  Every single one. 

 

The idea is to have more plays that create scoring chances than to create plays that create scoring chances against.  Anytime a defenceman is at 74% or nearly 3:1 in terms of xG for vs xG against when he is on the ice in a game, thats a fantastic game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, The Chicoutimi Cucumber said:

 

Good Lord, I sure did. Up there in the nose-bleeds, surrounded by red sweaters, watching that madness unfold as two dubious teams basically played road hockey. Yowza!

 

I was so happy when Caufield scored that opening goal. He was on my side of the rink, so I had a direct line of sight to witness first-hand what may become one of the iconic sights of the next decade of Habs' history, i.e., Caufield blasting one in from the left hashmarks. 

 

This is a game that defied rational analysis. Complete carnage out there. However, it was interesting to see the Habs live, something I haven't done since well before Covid.

 

Random observations:

 

  • Habs made a LOT of "young team" mistakes. I mean things like pointless icings, where you miscalculate where you're shooting the puck from so it crosses multiple lines; multiple breakdowns on the same play; sloppy plays around the team's blueline to fumble a clearing pass; that sort of thing. They also fell down a lot at key moments (my God, Mattheson in OT was comically brutal), which may have had to do with the ice, I dunno. 
  • Anderson is a better player live than on TV. He does a lot of positional and physical things out there that you don't necessarily notice on the telecast. A tough player to play against. I guarantee you his teammates love what he brings, and opponents hate him, even if fans don't always appreciate it.
  • Dach looked very strong on his skates, an impressive-looking player.
  • Edmundson looked just terrible for much of the night. Sort of Anderson in reverse - a guy who seems to be a lot worse live than on the broadcast. Ugh. Or maybe he just had a bad game. But watching him caused me to rethink my previously-staunch belief in his value.
  • I enjoyed the running commentary from the Habs fans around me. One pointed out that Armia never, ever shoots. A pertinent observation, even if the Armia line was fairly strong on the forecheck much of the night. He also poked holes in Evans's game. Evans was a mixed bag for sure.  He shouldn't be expected to play too many minutes.
  • Slaf: I was relieved he wasn't injured on the hit. He plays the game in an "aw shucks" way that may just be part of who he is as a player, but he worries me. He does some good things, is strong and a good skater, but (1) I don't think he protects himself properly - he's already suffered 3 or 4 explosive hits this season, and I would expect that eventually he will suffer serious injury; and (2) he has that early Kotkaniemi "gee, I'm just happy to be here" vibe where he doesn't seem to feel a need to drive anything or impose himself on the game. Understandable, but I don't want that settling in as a habit for him. It's something I've seen from too many Habs prospects over the years - and when they wake up 3-4 years later and realize they're expected to manufacture things, it's often too late to flip the switch. For both reasons, he should be down in Laval: learning to play with his head up and anticipate being a target in the North American environment, and learning to be the take-charge guy who drives a team. I do not understand what the Habs are doing with him.

I wore the Doug Harvey last night. Ironically, that game was the antithesis of what I understand Doug Harvey's play to be, i.e., cerebral, controlling, masterful. Oh well. One thing these young Habs are is never boring!

 

  

thank you for the summary.

 

what did you think of Harris' game.

 

two late goals were on him, the pass between his legs, and one later when he was on the side of the net watching the play. On TV he seemed to be hemmed-in in his zone and not able to go for a change, multiple times. He had two points early in the game but I think he gave up more points that he got, despite the stats. He is not able to handle physical players and seems "light"/"over-matched" on the boards

 

am I way off on Harris?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Commandant said:

 

xGF% isn't an offensive metric.   You really should look into it before declaring that a defenceman should be "weighted more on defensive metrics rather than offensive ones."  This sentence tells me that you don't even understand the statistic.

 

Its a metric that includes both offence and defence.  Its a balance. In short, if you are at 50% that means the number of good scoring chances that happened when you are on the ice is equal to the number of good chances against.  At nearly 75% he is at a ratio where the Habs had 3 quality scoring chances for, for every one against, while he was on the ice.  I'll take that every day of the week and every game of the year.  And no, not each chance is treated equally, its more than that and also factors in the quality of the chances.

 

Kovacevic and Edmundson were both brutal last night....  including Kovacevic taking a brutal penalty in the last 2 minutes. 

So all the the chances for and against that are included in this metric are directly a result of the player being measured by it, right?  I mean, it's not possible that these chances could of happened regardless of this player being there or not.  There's no possibility the player being measured by it could have no bearing on the play whatsoever as it's one that only takes in account if they are on the ice or not for the chance or not, right?

 

Also this metric is a balanced metric, not a defensive one.  For example, a player could have a great xGF% if they stand at the blue line, not touching the puck while the rest of their team gets great scoring chances and a few goals, but as soon as he touches the puck it ends up on the opponent's stick and into his own net.  As long as the good chances and goals for the rest of his team is 3-1 ratio, this player has amazing xGF%. 

 

How about he was on the ice for 3 goals against.  Wouldn't Montreal need to have scored 9 while he was on the ice to keep the metric at 3-1?  Or is it only about shots, so the more important goals isn't factored into it?

 

How about standing in front of the net to cut off the cross-crease pass and not cutting off the pass or taking his man, directly leading to a goal against.  What advanced stat measures that?

 

How about when Montembeault gave the puck away Harris not keeping his man out of the crease, so when Montembeault got back to his net he couldn't get to the top of the crease to cut the angle more?  Would it of stopped the goal?  Maybe not, but keeping players out of the goalie's crease seems to be a defenseman responsibility.

 

Advanced stats don't tell the truth of a game, it paints a picture of what you want to see.  According to advanced stats, Josh Anderson is overall the best Canadien's forward in most offensive metrics, except goals and assists.  Drouin has a better xGF% than Guhle as well, so defensively, Drouin is better than Guhle, right?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

the one thing with statistics is that 15 (shifts per game) samples is not a population and bias is guaranteed. 82 separate sets of samples may show a trend but does not confirm or negates an hypothesis.

 

a few thousand samples (82x15 = 1230) is a better mark. I have seen the 200 games mark being used as a criteria by some GMs (200x15 = 3000 shifts)

 

I take advance stats on Hockey players with a grain of salt, and maybe an ice cold brew... or two 🍺🍺

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Commandant said:

[...]

Kovacevic and Edmundson were both brutal last night....  including Kovacevic taking a brutal penalty in the last 2 minutes. 

 

funny how perception varies between individuals:

 

Translation: "Kovacevic played 22:49 but the 13 goals were scored during the 37:24 where he was not on the ice"

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, TurdBurglar said:

So all the the chances for and against that are included in this metric are directly a result of the player being measured by it, right?  I mean, it's not possible that these chances could of happened regardless of this player being there or not.  There's no possibility the player being measured by it could have no bearing on the play whatsoever as it's one that only takes in account if they are on the ice or not for the chance or not, right?

 

Also this metric is a balanced metric, not a defensive one.  For example, a player could have a great xGF% if they stand at the blue line, not touching the puck while the rest of their team gets great scoring chances and a few goals, but as soon as he touches the puck it ends up on the opponent's stick and into his own net.  As long as the good chances and goals for the rest of his team is 3-1 ratio, this player has amazing xGF%. 

 

How about he was on the ice for 3 goals against.  Wouldn't Montreal need to have scored 9 while he was on the ice to keep the metric at 3-1?  Or is it only about shots, so the more important goals isn't factored into it?

 

How about standing in front of the net to cut off the cross-crease pass and not cutting off the pass or taking his man, directly leading to a goal against.  What advanced stat measures that?

 

How about when Montembeault gave the puck away Harris not keeping his man out of the crease, so when Montembeault got back to his net he couldn't get to the top of the crease to cut the angle more?  Would it of stopped the goal?  Maybe not, but keeping players out of the goalie's crease seems to be a defenseman responsibility.

 

Advanced stats don't tell the truth of a game, it paints a picture of what you want to see.  According to advanced stats, Josh Anderson is overall the best Canadien's forward in most offensive metrics, except goals and assists.  Drouin has a better xGF% than Guhle as well, so defensively, Drouin is better than Guhle, right?

 

You could have just wrote that you don't understand advanced stats, cause this is drivel. 

 

This isn't midget hockey... players don't stand at the opposing blue line and do nothing and watch the play. 

 

As for why its chances and not goals, because we want to equalize for the goaltending, knowing that not all goalies are equal and this is the problem with +/-.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, alfredoh2009 said:

the one thing with statistics is that 15 (shifts per game) samples is not a population and bias is guaranteed. 82 separate sets of samples may show a trend but does not confirm or negates an hypothesis.

 

a few thousand samples (82x15 = 1230) is a better mark. I have seen the 200 games mark being used as a criteria by some GMs (200x15 = 3000 shifts)

 

I take advance stats on Hockey players with a grain of salt, and maybe an ice cold brew... or two 🍺🍺

 

 

Larger sample sizes are always better, I agree.  They tell you what should be expected of a player. 

 

That said, Harris had a great game and was unlucky to be burned by some bad goaltending, i mean one of the minuses was because Montembault can't handle the puck.  Another was that Edmundson wasn't doing his job.   Over 200 games, those things even out.... 

 

But we can say that he played well last night and thats something to build off of.  If he keeps playing the way he played last night, its not many nights he will end up in a 7-6 game and even in the +/- dept.  

 

And if Kovacevic keeps putting up 36% xGF and takes bad penalties like the one in the final minute, then he won't be on the roster long.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, alfredoh2009 said:

 

funny how perception varies between individuals:

 

Translation: "Kovacevic played 22:49 but the 13 goals were scored during the 37:24 where he was not on the ice"

 

 

Yeah cause he was in the penalty box on the goal that tied the game cause he made a brutal trip 80 feet from his net.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, alfredoh2009 said:

thank you for the summary.

 

what did you think of Harris' game.

 

two late goals were on him, the pass between his legs, and one later when he was on the side of the net watching the play. On TV he seemed to be hemmed-in in his zone and not able to go for a change, multiple times. He had two points early in the game but I think he gave up more points that he got, despite the stats. He is not able to handle physical players and seems "light"/"over-matched" on the boards

 

am I way off on Harris?

 

FWIW, I didn't really notice Harris. Some would argue that that's a good thing - I believe his ceiling is as the kind of defender who quietly eats loads of minutes and puts up great advanced stats, without necessarily drawing attention to himself. Or maybe I was just busy being distracted by other players and events.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, The Chicoutimi Cucumber said:

 

FWIW, I didn't really notice Harris. Some would argue that that's a good thing - I believe his ceiling is as the kind of defender who quietly eats loads of minutes and puts up great advanced stats, without necessarily drawing attention to himself. Or maybe I was just busy being distracted by other players and events.

 

 

thank you for the reply, much appreciated.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, Commandant said:

 

You could have just wrote that you don't understand advanced stats, cause this is drivel. 

 

This isn't midget hockey... players don't stand at the opposing blue line and do nothing and watch the play. 

 

As for why its chances and not goals, because we want to equalize for the goaltending, knowing that not all goalies are equal and this is the problem with +/-.

None of it is drivel.  The fact that you believe, and I quote, “this was Harris’ best game all year,” when he was directly responsible for 2 goals against and partially responsible for a 3rd in 15 minutes TOI, is just mind-boggling.

 

Its also ludicrous you believe Kovacevic was “brutal” for not being on the ice for a goal against in a 7-6 game, while playing nearly 23 minutes.  All based on a penalty?  
 

If you didn’t watch the game and this is your opinion, I can see why you would make these statements, but you should listen to the people that actually watched the game.  If you watched the game and that is your analysis, I’m floored at how asinine your take is on last night’s game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Again... in a single game situation goaltending can bail you out or make you look worse. I strongly disagree that harris is at fault when montembault gave the puck away.

 

I also.saw kovacevic penned in his end all night.

 

Again... over a large sample when the goaltending evens out, the guy with 34% is going to be on for more goals against and the guy at 74% less.

 

Judging anything by plus/minus which is what you do when you only look at goals... is the asinine thing 

 

xGF% is a far better predictor of future goals/goals against than +/-.  The.correlation isn't close.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Commandant said:

Judging anything by plus/minus which is what you do when you only look at goals... is the asinine thing 

 

xGF% is a far better predictor of future goals/goals against than +/-.  The.correlation isn't close.

Nobody was talking about the +/- and nobody talking about the future, we are talking about last night's game, that's called gaslighting. 

 

What we are looking at is the play where Harris gave the puck away in the neutral zone and fell down trying to make up for his mistake, giving Garland a partial break, leaving Xhekaj flat footed to defend on his own.  Also the play where he stood in front of Montembeault, in the passing lane, not taking his man, while allowing the pass to go through him for an easy goal.  Take the man or take the pass, you don't get to do neither.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, TurdBurglar said:

None of it is drivel. 

 

1 hour ago, Commandant said:

Again... in a single game situation goaltending can bail you out or make you look worse.

 

ALL RIGHT, time for the bare-knuckle round...:popcorn:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, DON said:

 

ALL RIGHT, time for the bare-knuckle round...:popcorn:

Nah, no bare-knuckle round.  Everyone can have bad opinions, I sure do at times.  This forum is for debating differences of opinions. I just draw the line at back-handed insults, and because of this I'm not going to engage with him anymore on it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • tomh009 changed the title to Game #25 - 12/5/22 Habs v.s. Canuckleheads

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.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...