bishopshodan Posted January 14 Share Posted January 14 2 minutes ago, stawns said: And that's hockey yep, Then when Lafferty got hit....Miller returned the favour, not that it was taregted but he went for a big hit...then Buffalo started aiming at Hughes etc.. Just pointing out, i guess, that the Lafferty hit wasn't the beginning. From Buff pov, the Hronek hit started it... That's hockey. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barn Burner Posted January 14 Share Posted January 14 6 minutes ago, bishopshodan said: Hi I'm not saying Hronek threw an elbow. I am saying Buff and their media still thought he did ( was some contact to the head) and that's what set off the bad intentions. Hronek clearly wasn't trying to throw an elbow. He was trying to make contact with the pass and score, which incidentally, caught the Sabre. It was accidental. No intent. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bishopshodan Posted January 14 Share Posted January 14 14 minutes ago, stawns said: Be glad that's what they called it. Hit to the head would have been 2 and 10. That's what I thought at the time too. Ther were actually giving Miller the benifit of the doubt...if was targeted to the head it would have been bigger punishment... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-dlc- Posted January 14 Share Posted January 14 6 minutes ago, Bob Long said: I guess that's where we differ. Would you really be ok with a team winning a cup that way? "is and always has been" "this is the best it's ever been" Because you say so? "I like" The last part is what opinions are...the rest, being presented as facts are just actually stuff tied into "I like" and opinion. Not facts. Which is what bugs me....no, you don't tell us what hockey is or how it's always been. We have our own opinions and they're as relevant/"factual" as your ideas. Sigh, wish I didn't see quotes. More of the same....JT WILL BE gone. Yes, sure, ok because you said so. But wait....... 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bishopshodan Posted January 14 Share Posted January 14 1 minute ago, Barn Burner said: Hronek clearly wasn't trying to throw an elbow. He was trying to make contact with the pass and score, which incidentally, caught the Sabre. It was accidental. No intent. i see it that way too.. Buff...still don't. Their media is running with it as an elbow. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe King Posted January 14 Share Posted January 14 5 minutes ago, stawns said: That is and always has been a part of the game. Again, this is the best it's ever been. I like that refs have personality and bias. It adds another dimension to the game. We always knew who was reffing our games and how they felt about us as a team and as individuals........it made things more interesting There should be no bias. People pay big money to watch their teams. 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-dlc- Posted January 14 Share Posted January 14 2 minutes ago, bishopshodan said: yep, Then when Lafferty got hit....Miller returned the favour, not that it was taregted but he went for a big hit...then Buffalo started aiming at Hughes etc.. Just pointing out, i guess, that the Lafferty hit wasn't the beginning. From Buff pov, the Hronek hit started it... That's hockey. But where do the refs come in? Partway through? Never? When they feel like it? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AnthonyG Posted January 14 Share Posted January 14 19 hours ago, HKSR said: Being able to win 1 goal games is so important to success in the playoffs. We beat the reffs the game before. Another highly important part of success 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NHL Tyranny Posted January 14 Share Posted January 14 1 hour ago, stawns said: They weren't gifted anything, the pp in ot was a pretty obvious penalty did you see the call late in the third? BS 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stawns Posted January 14 Share Posted January 14 6 minutes ago, Bob Long said: I guess that's where we differ. Would you really be ok with a team winning a cup that way? It's never been any different. Actually, it's better than it's ever been. The only way you're going to get the human aspect out of officiating is by removing humans from the equation Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Long Posted January 14 Share Posted January 14 1 minute ago, -dlc- said: "is and always has been" "this is the best it's ever been" "I like" The last part is what opinions are...the rest, being presented as factual are just actually stuff tied into "I like" and opinion. Not facts. Which is what bugs me....no, you don't tell us what hockey is or how it's always been. We have our own opinions and they're as relevant/"factual" as your ideas. Sigh, wish I didn't see quotes. More of the same....JT WILL BE gone. Yes, sure, ok because you said so. But..... I know that I don't pay to watch refs. I think/hope what might happen is some smart young AI programmer will come up with a site that shows reffing bias and calls it out. Maybe that can take the bias out. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kragar Posted January 14 Share Posted January 14 10 minutes ago, stawns said: The canicks were just as chippy to begin with, sometimes that's how games go. I can't imagine anyone thinking that game was even remotely out of control. It got a little rough, a little chippy, big deal Were they chippy throughout? I'm not claiming our guys were angels, as there were a few calls that were let go that surprised me earlier on. But the refs had opportunities to settle things down when things heated up after Samuelsson and Dahlin got hurt, and they didn't. They looked hard at giving Miller 5 and a game, which is fine, but they made the right call (which I saw you agree with, too). When the Sabres start taking shots at Huggy, that's when calls should have been made, and they weren't. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stawns Posted January 14 Share Posted January 14 1 minute ago, NHL Tyranny said: did you see the call late in the third? BS I didn't think so Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-dlc- Posted January 14 Share Posted January 14 1 minute ago, NHL Tyranny said: did you see the call late in the third? BS We don't talk about that. "Whataboutism" is the way to avoid it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Long Posted January 14 Share Posted January 14 Just now, stawns said: It's never been any different. Actually, it's better than it's ever been. The only way you're going to get the human aspect out of officiating is by removing humans from the equation Works for me. AI it. I pay to watch players not refs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stawns Posted January 14 Share Posted January 14 Just now, Bob Long said: I know that I don't pay to watch refs. I think/hope what might happen is some smart young AI programmer will come up with a site that shows reffing bias and calls it out. Maybe that can take the bias out. How is that going to change anything? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bishopshodan Posted January 14 Share Posted January 14 Just now, -dlc- said: But where do the refs come in? Partway through? Never? When they feel like it? Oh, The Refs suck Deb. No consistency. i think I was just rewinding the tape to show Buffalo's POV. They felt wronged from the Hronek hit. That is whre it all started. When Greenway did what he did, they should have been penalized. Seeing Tocc freak out about that was big for me, I am liking this coach more and more. Those kind of hits drive me nuts. The Ref's should have done better in the game. It had the potential to get really ugly lastnight 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stawns Posted January 14 Share Posted January 14 Just now, Bob Long said: Works for me. AI it. I pay to watch players not refs. So call every single infraction that occurs during a game? Great idea Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Long Posted January 14 Share Posted January 14 Just now, stawns said: How is that going to change anything? Because the really biased refs can be called out. It will give GM's and owners actual evidence. Fans too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AnthonyG Posted January 14 Share Posted January 14 13 minutes ago, Bob Long said: So how can we tell the difference between a mistake and a biased ref? Cough, Sutherland. Just go play a game in Pittsburgh and you’ll see the difference 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Long Posted January 14 Share Posted January 14 Just now, stawns said: So call every single infraction that occurs during a game? Great idea Never said that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stawns Posted January 14 Share Posted January 14 1 minute ago, Kragar said: Were they chippy throughout? I'm not claiming our guys were angels, as there were a few calls that were let go that surprised me earlier on. But the refs had opportunities to settle things down when things heated up after Samuelsson and Dahlin got hurt, and they didn't. They looked hard at giving Miller 5 and a game, which is fine, but they made the right call (which I saw you agree with, too). When the Sabres start taking shots at Huggy, that's when calls should have been made, and they weren't. Sure they were, what's wrong with that? They were chippy, buffalo was chippy, it was an entertaining game. Shouldn't we be happy about that? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-dlc- Posted January 14 Share Posted January 14 Just now, Bob Long said: I know that I don't pay to watch refs. I think/hope what might happen is some smart young AI programmer will come up with a site that shows reffing bias and calls it out. Maybe that can take the bias out. To be honest, I'm over the refs and hoping they get it right. I just now assume they won't and go with that. But the team isn't wilting and that's the takeaway for me. We win DESPITE the refs. At times, I get hopeful as they make a good call/non call or two. Then they let someone smash our guys in the face after the whistle's blown and they're right there and...nothing. So sigh, back to square one. The reffing's awful and inconsistent. I can make that statement and feel quite confident in it. Despite how some have argued of hard it is, how fast the game is, how these are the best of the best. We've shifted from that narrative now...now it's that they're subjective. Which is inching closer to the truth. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kragar Posted January 14 Share Posted January 14 17 minutes ago, -dlc- said: The reason it does matter is an elbow implies someone's targeting high and that rep can stick....but that wasn't the case. Dahlin stretched out/reached and JT wasn't going high on him. His own body positioning put him in a vulnerable state. Nothing dirty there (at all) and roughing seems more appropriate. JT went in for a good, solid hit. Greenway, however....was intentionally dirty/a cheap shot after the goal. And that was....let go. "Subjective" The fact that they can't determine what to call speaks volumes to me in "maybe there's nothing there TO call then?" I just hated the inconsistency. If you call that, sure....but call the post whistle high slams our players took or it's lopsided and advantageous to one team. Which it was. I'm with ya for the most part. The inconsistency is hard to deal with, for sure. I don't think the difference in calling it roughing or elbowing is going to impact JT's reputation within the league. He's a known quantity, and opposing players will see the hit for what it is when they watch it. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-dlc- Posted January 14 Share Posted January 14 2 minutes ago, stawns said: So call every single infraction that occurs during a game? Great idea No, but the one's that leave a guy's face bleeding post whistle. You know, those ones. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.