http://www.sabresjunkie.com/forum/ |
|
| A rational response http://www.sabresjunkie.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=3055 |
Page 1 of 2 |
| Author: | Sabresfansince1980 [ Mon Apr 19, 2010 10:16 pm ] |
| Post subject: | A rational response |
Boston was less talented coming into this series, but they had the tried and true playoff game plan of clutch, grab, and simply play physical. Buffalo still had the edge in talent and goaltending enough to overcome this until two things panned out... 1) This series became very physical and full of un-called penalties right from the start. This CLEARLY favors Boston. You can stomp feet and yell for the Sabres to equal the physicality and edgey play, but this is something that they don't have very much of on the roster, and isn't their recipe for success in the first place. The first three games have been so chippy that somebody should've been shorthanded for at least half the time so far. Since the refs are so afraid of a penalty call to play a role in the final score, they put the whistles away and we see a clutch after grab after high-stick after blatent interference and on and on. This puts Boston's game plan, and their team in general, in the advantage over the team that finished higher while the regular season was officiated somewhere near what the rule book states. 2) Partially due to the above, Vanek gets chopped down and effectively out of the series. Buffalo's advantage in talent was already somewhat negated by the injuries to Hecht, Stafford, Connolly (who still has a broken foot). Still managing an effective offense, the Vanek injury blew that up completely. We see all the lines jumbled and any semblence of chemistry gone. So now we have a game or two adjustment period, with players out or playing hurt against a team who's physical advantage has been multiplied by injuries and a reluctance to call penalties the same as in the regular season. Tonight Connolly was high-sticked while on the PP - no call. Myers was elbowed behind the net which led to a near goal - no call. Recchi committed the textbook definition of interference when he knocked Kennedy over before the winning goal - no call. I'm trying real hard not to sound like a whiner, but this is less about the Sabres and more about my aggravation with the NHL. The game should be officiated to enforce the rules that are supposed to allow the best part of the game to take place. I did not sit through 82 games of the regular season to watch a playoff tournament that allows it's games to degenerate into mud wrestling. If the rules are going to be loosened or ignored, than any team that brings skill, skating, and finesse to the playoffs will instantly have that advantage eliminated when they are never rewarded for drawing penalties. With all this in mind, I just can't find that much fault for Buffalo failing to produce many scoring chances. Everything is against them and at this point it would be a near miracle for Buffalo to win this series. |
|
| Author: | PuckSniperPensel [ Mon Apr 19, 2010 10:22 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: A rational response |
Great post. And we don't typically agree on much. Spot on. |
|
| Author: | mechaphil [ Mon Apr 19, 2010 10:25 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: A rational response |
But it comes back to Buffalo is doomed. Righteous. Again, we agree. |
|
| Author: | gr8daygo [ Mon Apr 19, 2010 10:30 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: A rational response |
excellent post! two questions come to mind.... 1. is there any way for the sabres to over come? 2. who is to blame for the lack of enforcement of the rules? |
|
| Author: | Godzilla1960 [ Mon Apr 19, 2010 10:31 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: A rational response |
Sabresfansince1980 wrote: Everything is against them and at this point it would be a near miracle for Buffalo to win this series. Fail. I understand what you are saying, but you make it sound like Buffalo is some European minor league team playing against a gold medal all-star team. |
|
| Author: | CriminallyVu1gar [ Mon Apr 19, 2010 10:32 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: A rational response |
Yeah, I pretty much agree wholeheartedly. I've been saying since late 07 about how stupid the NHL is in going back on its post lockout mantra of opening the game up and turning the NHL into a contest of who can cheat the best, especially in the playoffs. |
|
| Author: | CriminallyVu1gar [ Mon Apr 19, 2010 10:33 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: A rational response |
I also have to say that I don't think it's in our best interests to play a physical game. That's Boston's game, not ours, and we look awkward as hell trying to match it. We should use our team speed and energy to try and skate rings around what should be a slow and hobbled Boston team. |
|
| Author: | Skyline_BNR34 [ Mon Apr 19, 2010 10:35 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: A rational response |
Every playoff game is reffed terribly. I'm sorry, but call the game like it was in the regular season. I could see some getting away with some, but fully blatant things need to be called. And we are losing 2-1, we aren't out of it yet. It's not like we are down 3-1 or 3-0 right now. |
|
| Author: | Sabresfansince1980 [ Mon Apr 19, 2010 10:38 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: A rational response |
Godzilla1960 wrote: Sabresfansince1980 wrote: Everything is against them and at this point it would be a near miracle for Buffalo to win this series. Fail. I understand what you are saying, but you make it sound like Buffalo is some European minor league team playing against a gold medal all-star team. No, you're making it sound like I said that. Connolly has a broken foot, Stafford just skated yesterday, Vanek will be far less than 100% when he returns, and Hecht is out for sure. All this to overcome during a series that is being officiated in a way that favors Boston's physical edge. How is this a "fail", unless you somehow still see Buffalo as the favorite to win? |
|
| Author: | Skyline_BNR34 [ Mon Apr 19, 2010 10:41 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: A rational response |
I don't think Connolly is having a problem skating, he is having a problem controlling his stick. Stafford played like a fucking man on a mission since being out from the bit I saw from him tonight. Hecht is gone for the series, we knew that. Vanek should be fine when he comes back also. |
|
| Author: | PuckSniperPensel [ Mon Apr 19, 2010 10:41 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: A rational response |
I read something this season about the general manager meetings and it stated that a group of 6 GMs were going to bring up this issue of officiating and how it has slipped from 05-06. I think they're right. Many of the other GMs blew them, and the issue, off. |
|
| Author: | mechaphil [ Mon Apr 19, 2010 10:43 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: A rational response |
The NHL is more profitable now than it was before the lockout. The owners are making money, the players are making money. Little will change. |
|
| Author: | squirrel [ Mon Apr 19, 2010 10:43 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: A rational response |
Watch how Lindy dishes his icetime and runs the pp and tell me if other teams do such things? no team is switching pp guys that much. How can anyone develop chemistry when it's changed all the time? He is being out coached. The other night LA was down 2 goals and they double shifted the top line(then they tied it). Lindy has his lines stay out for only 30 seconds. Ennis, Connolly and Poms had a 16 second shift at the 5 minute mark then Ennis was on the bench for the rest of the game. Lindy and James Patrick had the "talk" with Ennis about staying on the ice too long(40 seconds) and not just going over the blueline and just shooting like Mair, Ellis and the other no talent bums. No team is doing this(with icetime) unless it's the 3rd overtime and they are tired. Watch a Pittsburgh game and watch Malkin and Crosby play full 2 minute pps and down a goal late never leave the ice. Lindy Ruff is the only coach in the history of hockey that has his team change lines with 15 seconds left in a game while guys are racing up ice for a chance. By the time the guys come on the ice the game is over. Lindy should get coach of the year for replacing Myers(super rookie with 48 points) on pp and installing Lydman. Does Lydman ever shoot the puck without it getting blocked? Why is Lydman even still on the team? |
|
| Author: | Squanto [ Mon Apr 19, 2010 10:45 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: A rational response |
While I'm never one to blame the officials, it has gotten bad. I didn't see the game tonight (was in scuba class), but there was a lot of talk on the radio of some interference penalty behind the net that wasn't called, and lead to a goal. Miller said on the postgame that in competition committee meetings, that type of play isn't interference because it was two guys fighting to GET to a puck. If that's the standard of officiating now, combined with allowing defensemen to hold up forecheckers again, you might as well put the league back into the dead puck era. |
|
| Author: | Sabresfansince1980 [ Mon Apr 19, 2010 10:46 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: A rational response |
Skyline_BNR34 wrote: I don't think Connolly is having a problem skating, Vanek should be fine when he comes back also. Connolly simply can't keep the pace up, and a broken foot has a lot more to do with that than his stickhandling. Even the bonehead VS announcers could see that Connolly is slow. As for Vanek, you just keep pretending that he wasn't skating on one foot and crawling back to the bench the other night. He won't be anywhere near "fine", but I respect his desire to play on it anyway. |
|
| Author: | mechaphil [ Mon Apr 19, 2010 10:47 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: A rational response |
Hey look, Ferret's back. Go choke on a dick. |
|
| Author: | Squanto [ Mon Apr 19, 2010 10:47 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: A rational response |
No offense ferret, but when you aren't here for months, then magically show up after 2 playoff losses in a row, it's hard to put a lot of stock into your opinions, even when I don't totally disagree with them. |
|
| Author: | powerplayer [ Mon Apr 19, 2010 10:47 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: A rational response |
Sabresfansince1980 wrote: Buffalo's advantage in talent was already somewhat negated by the injuries to Hecht, Stafford, Connolly (who still has a broken foot). Still managing an effective offense, the Vanek injury blew that up completely. We see all the lines jumbled and any semblence of chemistry gone. Maybe just maybe the incredible amount of injury this Bruins team experienced throughout the season had them looking like a lesser team coming into the playoffs than they really are. I never bought into all the "I'm not scared of Boston" comments floating around. Let's face it, after suffering the most (or 2nd most) injuries in the league, and still landing in 6th place, you must be better than some are alluding to. And they're still missing their top player marc Savard. He has better numbers than Vanek usually. I'm a little surprised at the comments criticizing the refs for NOT cracking down on more. I usually read posts criticizing the refs for calling too much, instead preferring a more wide open game. |
|
| Author: | Squanto [ Mon Apr 19, 2010 10:47 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: A rational response |
mechaphil wrote: Hey look, Ferret's back. Go choke on a dick. Please don't Phil.... |
|
| Author: | YankeeInRaleigh [ Mon Apr 19, 2010 10:49 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: A rational response |
Well...we really cannot complain about the non-call on the interference on Kennedy. They simultaneously decided to take the others body instead of actually going for the puck. I dont see how you can call a penalty in that situation, because they're both equally interfering with each other. If Kennedy had been reaching for the puck, but Recchi had taken him out before he could get to it then it would be penalty worthy, but...I dont think that instance was. Kennedy just made a bad choice, and is small, and got thrown the fuck down. |
|
| Page 1 of 2 | All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ] |
| Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ |
|