10:24 - Bruins @ Blackhawks
- Thread starter cshea
- Start date
Yup. Monty and Sweeney are probably going to tell him to find a place to live in Boston.
I think that winning 3-0 counts the same as winning 5-2. Though there may be a 8th level tiebreaker somewhere that uses GF
Thought it was Ferraro’s voice who said it was above the eye & he was at ice level, so he should’ve had a good look….here’s hoping
https://x.com/FlutoShinzawa/status/1717021717002887302?s=20
Jakub Lauko is OK. Left side of his face is red but he’s smiling.
Jakub Lauko is OK. Left side of his face is red but he’s smiling.
I think the rule and league* would really benefit from eliminating slow motion from off side challenges. If it’s not obvious enough at game speed within a short period of time (say 30 seconds to be generous) then no significant advantage was gained and the play stands as called.
The rule was put in place to prevent the kind of play it was specifically created in response to, but an offside that egregious is so rarely missed that the only thing it does is police plays that are too close to matter or entirely irrelevant.
*I think all leagues would benefit from this kind of provision in the replay system but especially this specific call.
In other news, that Poitras burst and goal was shades of Seguin against Tampa.
Agreed, defense and goaltending will need to carry them. Luckily they have the talent in those areas to do just that.
I think my change would be that if the puck cycles below the goal line and then back above it and the guilty party is within one step of the blue line at entry, any advantage gained from being an inch offsides has disappeared, and so I‘d rule it irrelevant to the play on review and let the play stand. So you still wouldn’t want to be offsides in the event a cycle didn‘t happen, but if you‘re mid stride and it does cycle after being just offsides, who cares? Like refs basically do this with the follow through to waive off icing, let’s do it on this too.