mfitz804 Posted February 12, 2018 Share Posted February 12, 2018 6 minutes ago, Colorado Rockies 1976 said: And I'm sorry, if it takes THAT friggin' long to see if the puck crossed the line...it's not conclusive. I'm really confused as to how a lot of people (not you necessarily, CR76) view replays. On the Hall and Johansson offsides, people were screaming about how the referees screwed us. Those calls went in our favor. If you want to argue that the replay was inconclusive and it shouldn't have been overturned, I get that argument. But if the refs are out to screw you, you don't get the call on the ice. On the goal last night, if you want to argue the refs screwed us by calling that a goal on the ice, I can see where you are coming from. But then people are arguing that the replay was inconclusive. If the replay is inconclusive, the call on the ice stands. So arguing that it was inconclusive is not really relevant. It just seems like sometimes people are making the wrong argument. 5 minutes ago, Neb00rs said: I've never seen the refs call something a goal when there is absolutely no evidence that the puck went over the line. I have no idea how they could have called that a goal, no way anyone saw the puck. And, I would add, the ref that was right behind the goal was right there, never made a motion, just stood there like a statue until time expired. How can the "call on the ice" be a goal, when no call was ever made??? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mfitz804 Posted February 12, 2018 Share Posted February 12, 2018 7 minutes ago, Neb00rs said: For me, with these calls, it's just that I've never seen anything like them before, especially last night's. I've never seen the refs call something a goal when there is absolutely no evidence that the puck went over the line. If anything, they've erred on the opposite side. It really boggles my mind that they called it a goal. I really think the Devils players do need to get on the refs a bit more. Not that it will make all the difference but don't be the nice guys, don't make it easy for them to look you in the eye and tell you that you were offsides. I also understand the desire for Hynes to go berserk and start throwing stuff, but he's not that guy. Plus, it would accomplish absolutely zero as you noted. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Triumph Posted February 12, 2018 Share Posted February 12, 2018 13 minutes ago, Colorado Rockies 1976 said: And I'm sorry, if it takes THAT friggin' long to see if the puck crossed the line...it's not conclusive. Would love to know what the ref saw that made him so sure that it went across the line in the first place. At the same time the Devils put themselves in a lousy position to begin with...that never should've happened. My guess is that he took into account the fact that Lack wasn't showing him the puck. That to me is the greatest evidence that the puck was probably in - if Lack knows it's not in and knows where the puck is, he reveals it to the ref, no goal. Instead not only did I never see where the puck was, I never saw it get fished out of wherever it was. I don't think it's a call NHL refs should be making like that, but I get it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colorado Rockies 1976 Posted February 12, 2018 Share Posted February 12, 2018 Just now, mfitz804 said: I'm really confused as to how a lot of people (not you necessarily, CR76) view replays. On the Hall and Johansson offsides, people were screaming about how the referees screwed us. Those calls went in our favor. If you want to argue that the replay was inconclusive and it shouldn't have been overturned, I get that argument. But if the refs are out to screw you, you don't get the call on the ice. On the goal last night, if you want to argue the refs screwed us by calling that a goal on the ice, I can see where you are coming from. But then people are arguing that the replay was inconclusive. If the replay is inconclusive, the call on the ice stands. So arguing that it was inconclusive is not really relevant. It just seems like sometimes people are making the wrong argument. I have no idea how they could have called that a goal, no way anyone saw the puck. And, I would add, the ref that was right behind the goal was right there, never made a motion, just stood there like a statue until time expired. How can the "call on the ice" be a goal, when no call was ever made??? The bolded was where I was coming from...but on that one I'm thinking "Man, it shouldn't be taking nearly this long if there's clear evidence that SUPPORTS the call." That's where my ass was chapped. I did see him call it goal on ice just after it happened though...I remember thinking "WTF, that's goal on the ice?!" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimmy Leeds Posted February 12, 2018 Share Posted February 12, 2018 The ref did indicate goal. This is what Lack said and I honestly believe it: "My stick was there, my blocker was there, my glove was over it," Lack said. "But I mean, if the ref says it was in, it was in. He didn't say anything and the third guy yelled, and all of a sudden it seemed he changed his opinion." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neb00rs Posted February 12, 2018 Share Posted February 12, 2018 3 minutes ago, Triumph said: My guess is that he took into account the fact that Lack wasn't showing him the puck. That to me is the greatest evidence that the puck was probably in - if Lack knows it's not in and knows where the puck is, he reveals it to the ref, no goal. Instead not only did I never see where the puck was, I never saw it get fished out of wherever it was. I don't think it's a call NHL refs should be making like that, but I get it. Your own comment explains that Lack might not have known where the puck was, which would be why he didn't reveal the puck as goalies do all the time. No matter what you try to shimmy your pads a bit and manipulate the puck away from the goal line, even if it might not be in. In any case, the ref isn't supposed to play detective, he's an official who is supposed to carry out the rules by the book. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimmy Leeds Posted February 12, 2018 Share Posted February 12, 2018 Anyone see this? I wonder when it was snapped Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DevsMan84 Posted February 12, 2018 Share Posted February 12, 2018 5 minutes ago, Jimmy Leeds said: Anyone see this? I wonder when it was snapped Apparently after Hall kicked it out of the goal. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colorado Rockies 1976 Posted February 12, 2018 Share Posted February 12, 2018 5 minutes ago, Neb00rs said: Your own comment explains that Lack might not have known where the puck was, which would be why he didn't reveal the puck as goalies do all the time. No matter what you try to shimmy your pads a bit and manipulate the puck away from the goal line, even if it might not be in. In any case, the ref isn't supposed to play detective, he's an official who is supposed to carry out the rules by the book. Yeah, felt like the ref made an educated guess at best. I don't want refs making those. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimmy Leeds Posted February 12, 2018 Share Posted February 12, 2018 3 minutes ago, DevsMan84 said: Apparently after Hall kicked it out of the goal. Are you sure? I ask because I don't know for sure and the refs hand is pointing down like he was still signaling goal. You're probably correct Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neb00rs Posted February 12, 2018 Share Posted February 12, 2018 FYI Taylor Hall was asked about the goal. He said it was close, but he didn't see it completely in. And Taylor has been the type of guy to be like, "Yeah I was offsides," with these close calls before. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mfitz804 Posted February 12, 2018 Share Posted February 12, 2018 53 minutes ago, Colorado Rockies 1976 said: The bolded was where I was coming from...but on that one I'm thinking "Man, it shouldn't be taking nearly this long if there's clear evidence that SUPPORTS the call." That's where my ass was chapped. I did see him call it goal on ice just after it happened though...I remember thinking "WTF, that's goal on the ice?!" I figured that was what you meant, that's why i said not necessarily you. 38 minutes ago, Jimmy Leeds said: Are you sure? I ask because I don't know for sure and the refs hand is pointing down like he was still signaling goal. You're probably correct The referee pointing doesn't mean "its in the goal right now", it just means it was a good goal. Even if it hit the back bar and came flying out, the call on the ice would be to point down into the goal to signal a good goal. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NJDfan1711 Posted February 12, 2018 Share Posted February 12, 2018 2 hours ago, NJDevils1214 said: On that note, I'm going on vacation to the Tampa area this week and have been looking forward to the game there on Saturday for a while. I've wanted to see a game in Tampa for years so I hope they don't suck. I will be at the game. Not sure who will be going with me, could be one of my Philly buddies who incidentally is one of the nicest guys in the world and would actually root with me and hope we win lol, but let me know if you have any interest in meeting up, if even just to say hello for a second and put a face to a name. I'll be in 123. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Satans Hockey Posted February 12, 2018 Share Posted February 12, 2018 1 hour ago, Colorado Rockies 1976 said: I know it's been debated multiple times, but I really do want to see the Devils lose their sh!t over one of these "huh?!" calls soon. I know the fallout could be costly within a game (penalties, etc), but the Devils just seem so damned PASSIVE when it comes to this sh!t...almost too calm to a fault. I like Hynes in general, but I guess I would just to like see him go full-human just one time. Yeah, probably won't make any difference, but I guess I'd like to see him show that some of this crap makes him as crazy as it makes us. If Roy was in net he would have absolutely threw a sh!t fit, probably flipped the goal over, smashed his stick against the boards all while screaming at the ref. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redruM Posted February 12, 2018 Share Posted February 12, 2018 1 hour ago, Jimmy Leeds said: The ref did indicate goal. This is what Lack said and I honestly believe it: "My stick was there, my blocker was there, my glove was over it," Lack said. "But I mean, if the ref says it was in, it was in. He didn't say anything and the third guy yelled, and all of a sudden it seemed he changed his opinion." my problem with this stmt is that his stick was in the net, parts of it far in the net, so if he's saying his stick made the save then its a goal, because his stick we clearly in the net. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimmy Leeds Posted February 12, 2018 Share Posted February 12, 2018 1 hour ago, mfitz804 said: The referee pointing doesn't mean "its in the goal right now", it just means it was a good goal. Even if it hit the back bar and came flying out, the call on the ice would be to point down into the goal to signal a good goal. Gee, thanks for clearing that up..................... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nicomo Posted February 13, 2018 Share Posted February 13, 2018 10 hours ago, Neb00rs said: Not sure if this was mentioned here yet but: Butcher got an assist too. Doesn't count officially though because he missed time due to injury. So that's 21 points over the 14 game streak (9 goals, 12 assists) and he's 12 points off Kucherov while having played 5 less games. If the Devils make the playoffs he should win the Hart. I know he won’t, but he should. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NJDevils1214 Posted February 13, 2018 Share Posted February 13, 2018 21 hours ago, NJDfan1711 said: I will be at the game. Not sure who will be going with me, could be one of my Philly buddies who incidentally is one of the nicest guys in the world and would actually root with me and hope we win lol, but let me know if you have any interest in meeting up, if even just to say hello for a second and put a face to a name. I'll be in 123. I'll let you know. Not sure where we are sitting yet because my friend was trying to get free tickets from his job. He just told me he got them a few min ago. 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.