Jump to content

GDT: Devils @ St. Louis 8:00 PM


MadDog2020

Recommended Posts

Just now, mfitz804 said:

He was clearly offsides. The officials improperly called it in our favor, had no choice but to reverse on review, and people are punching TVs and killing people. Like you didn’t know that rule existed!! 

 

Give me a break bro. Firstly the rule is outrageous and is applicable in situations it should not be. Secondly, for a play like that to be whistled for offsides, if you go back through the annals of NHL hockey applying the same ridiculousness that is in play now, I'd bet you would need to disqualify at least a quarter of all goals scored in league history. By a kunt hair?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, mfitz804 said:

He was clearly offsides. The officials improperly called it in our favor, had no choice but to reverse on review, and people are punching TVs and killing people. Like you didn’t know that rule existed!! 

 

In all seriousness, I don't think the refs wanted to reverse the call, I think that was the delay and that was there conversation after they put down the ipad. But they had to, because they're forced to obey these new rules.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, mfitz804 said:

He was clearly offsides. The officials improperly called it in our favor, had no choice but to reverse on review, and people are punching TVs and killing people. Like you didn’t know that rule existed!! 

 

It’s just the frustration boiling over from the Hall non-goal that should have counted. League owed them one. 

Edited by Nicomo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Since1982-83 said:

To be sure and for full disclosure: Had the offsides by a kunt hair been called against STL and cost them a goal, I would have called bullsh!t on that as well.

I hate the challenge. Hockey is not the NFL. Get the review out of my favorite sport. They should add another stat group for "Stats that should count but don't because of the bullsh!t review".

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Since1982-83 said:

Give me a break bro. Firstly the rule is outrageous and is applicable in situations it should not be. Secondly, for a play like that to be whistled for offsides, if you go back through the annals of NHL hockey applying the same ridiculousness that is in play now, I'd bet you would need to disqualify at least a quarter of all goals scored in league history. By a kunt hair?

I don’t disagree that the rule is stupid. But it exists and was properly enforced.

I've said before, I’m opposed to ALL video review, just play the game!

1 minute ago, Nicomo said:

It’s just the frustrating boiling over from the Hall non-goal that should have counted. League owed them one. 

I have to agree on that one. But clearly, it don’t work that way!

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Martyisth3b3st said:

The second replay was absolutely inconclusive. If it’s inconclusive you go with the call on the ice. The guilty party wasn’t even on the ice when the goal was scored. Nothing about that was okay.

and I don’t really hope people die. Just maybe lose a boner at a really bad time or step on legos.

Well I think we can all support a little erectile dysfunction and LEGO injuries. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, CommonDreads said:

So when is the NHL gonna go back and retroactively remove cups from teams' resumés because they once scored a goal was a pubic hair offsides? I mean after all they are the shining example of integrity in officiating.

The nuance of the call is indeed the crux of the issue with replay. The game moves so fast, offsides like these happen all the time. If you can challenge any offside that happened during an entire segment between whistles, it gives you a wide breadth. You basically should just keep in mind every close call that happens and then if something bad happens before the whistle blows, like a goal gets scored against you, just remember the closest non-call and challenge it. I suppose the punishment of a PP for being wrong should deter teams from using the challenge, but isn't it always worth it to reverse a goal?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Martyisth3b3st said:

Hall non-goal; 6 men on the ice with the Washington goal (AND ALL SIX JOINED THE GOAL CELEBRATION HUG!), no-call on MoJo being held on STL’s second goal and then this offsides no-goal. 

I’m wayyyyyy passed frustrated. I’m spitting.

Don't forget that sh!t tripping call on Vatanen.

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.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.