Jump to content
The Official Site of the Montréal Canadiens
Canadiens de Montreal

2019 Stanley Cup Final


habs_93
 Share

Recommended Posts

It’s been reportedly confirmed that Zdeno Chara suffered a broken jaw from a deflected Brayden Schenn shot during the second period of Game 4 of the Stanley Cup Final on Monday night. Boston’s captain left the ice immediately for repairs and team officials have still not confirmed the extent of his injury.

It’s expected that Chara will miss the rest of the series with such a serious injury. Boston lost both games to St. Louis when being forced to play with five defensemen, when Matt Grzelcyk was injured in Game 2, and Chara in Game 4.

The Bruins are really suffering on the backend as they’re already missing Kevan Miller and Chris Wagner, who are both sidelined for the Final. As a result, they’ll need to dig deep into the depth chart to fill the void for Game 5 back in Boston.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, kinot-2 said:

It’s been reportedly confirmed that Zdeno Chara suffered a broken jaw from a deflected Brayden Schenn shot during the second period of Game 4 of the Stanley Cup Final on Monday night. Boston’s captain left the ice immediately for repairs and team officials have still not confirmed the extent of his injury.

It’s expected that Chara will miss the rest of the series with such a serious injury. Boston lost both games to St. Louis when being forced to play with five defensemen, when Matt Grzelcyk was injured in Game 2, and Chara in Game 4.

The Bruins are really suffering on the backend as they’re already missing Kevan Miller and Chris Wagner, who are both sidelined for the Final. As a result, they’ll need to dig deep into the depth chart to fill the void for Game 5 back in Boston.

It looks like St. Louis might be able to wear down Boston with its physical play and forechecking.  Grzelcyk might return for Game 5.  

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Torey Krug is really a little punk in the same mould as Marchand. In these playoffs, he's taken several runs at players with dirty hits. Tonight, Nick Kypreos just called him out for trying to draw penalties on clean hits and whining at the ref. Sounds a lot like Marchand to me. A second rat!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, H_T_L said:

Now there's the true definition of irony,,,,, the Bruins complaining about officiating.:4224::4224::4224:

Loved watching Neely going ballistic. :D

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, jennifer_rocket said:

I don't feel bad for the Bruins, but the officiating is terrible. Man oh man, the NHL has such a major problem with its officiating.

The Bruins got hosed on the GWG. Do I feel bad for them? Nope. The Bruins have been the team that has broken and bent more rules than any other for the past decade, so they almost deserve to have this happen to them. Even this year in Round 1, with DeBrusk getting away with a major knee on Kadri or Krug getting away with skating all the way down the ice to level a guy on a clear charge... they've had their fair share of non-calls against them this post-season and they might not be in the SCF without them.

40 minutes ago, H_T_L said:

Now there's the true definition of irony,,,,, the Bruins complaining about officiating.:4224::4224::4224:

Sad part is that the Bruins have complained about reffing every year as far as I can remember. They're the biggest whiners in the whole NHL. The only difference is that they actually have a legit complaint this time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To my mind blown calls like this are a symptom of the NHL's "put the whistles away" mentality when it comes to playoff officiating.  Yes, that should have been a penalty, and yes, the B's have a legitimate complaint this time, but if St. Louis doesn't score a goal on that sequence there's no way anybody would be talking about that call this morning.  It's just one more in a long line of calls that get let go both ways in the name of "letting them play".  Usually that's just business as usual in the playoffs; it's only when a goal results from the non-call that it gets talked about like it's some big travesty.

I should add that I'm not saying that the trip shouldn't have been called, but rather I'd much prefer if the refs just called the rulebook in the same way they do in the regular season.  If you ask me, the way it is now is not only kind of dumb in general but also sets the NHL up for inevitable "controversies" like the one we saw last night.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Manatee-X said:

To my mind blown calls like this are a symptom of the NHL's "put the whistles away" mentality when it comes to playoff officiating.  Yes, that should have been a penalty, and yes, the B's have a legitimate complaint this time, but if St. Louis doesn't score a goal on that sequence there's no way anybody would be talking about that call this morning.  It's just one more in a long line of calls that get let go both ways in the name of "letting them play".  Usually that's just business as usual in the playoffs; it's only when a goal results from the non-call that it gets talked about like it's some big travesty.

I should add that I'm not saying that the trip shouldn't have been called, but rather I'd much prefer if the refs just called the rulebook in the same way they do in the regular season.  If you ask me, the way it is now is not only kind of dumb in general but also sets the NHL up for inevitable "controversies" like the one we saw last night.

I would prefer that the game is called the same way as well. I would be steaming if Montreal was in the Finals and someone took out Weber at the legs resulting in the game winning goal against in game five. I mean, playoff officiating just elimantes the benefit a team gets for being... well... better at hockey. Allowing the other team (or both teams in some cases) to just say "screw it" to the rule book is garbage. I mean, if one team is playing better and drawing infractions, they deserve the advantage of a powerplay. Not the disadvantage of being abused by the other team without the abusing team receiving any punishment.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, jennifer_rocket said:

I would prefer that the game is called the same way as well. I would be steaming if Montreal was in the Finals and someone took out Weber at the legs resulting in the game winning goal against in game five. I mean, playoff officiating just elimantes the benefit a team gets for being... well... better at hockey. Allowing the other team (or both teams in some cases) to just say "screw it" to the rule book is garbage. I mean, if one team is playing better and drawing infractions, they deserve the advantage of a powerplay. Not the disadvantage of being abused by the other team without the abusing team receiving any punishment.

JR, I reject your common sense approach to the POs. :frech1: . I really don't mind the ruins getting thoroughly screwed over, in order for the Blues to

 win. :lol: .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It definitely was a missed call. That said from Marchand punching someone in the back of the head while down on his knees after whistle to the non-major that turned the series against Vegas these playoffs have been a disaster for officiating. Even Kadri's hit might not of even happened if the knee on knee had been called earlier! (that was the worst officiated game I've ever saw). Then Kadri gets a suspension that is "the rest of the series" not a specific # of games , that has never happened. The league does have to do something in the future. Now you build a team to compete in today's NHL only to need a 1980's team to compete in the playoffs? I still want St. Louis to win, because as much as they may well have a reason to be upset over that call. The Bruins over the years (especially Marchand have gotten away with more than any team). The only thing that concerns me know is the officiating for next game, St. Louis better be careful.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Manatee-X said:

To my mind blown calls like this are a symptom of the NHL's "put the whistles away" mentality when it comes to playoff officiating.  Yes, that should have been a penalty, and yes, the B's have a legitimate complaint this time, but if St. Louis doesn't score a goal on that sequence there's no way anybody would be talking about that call this morning.  It's just one more in a long line of calls that get let go both ways in the name of "letting them play".  Usually that's just business as usual in the playoffs; it's only when a goal results from the non-call that it gets talked about like it's some big travesty.

I should add that I'm not saying that the trip shouldn't have been called, but rather I'd much prefer if the refs just called the rulebook in the same way they do in the regular season.  If you ask me, the way it is now is not only kind of dumb in general but also sets the NHL up for inevitable "controversies" like the one we saw last night.

 

 

They don't call the rulebook in the regular season. Never have. Never will. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Manatee-X said:

To my mind blown calls like this are a symptom of the NHL's "put the whistles away" mentality when it comes to playoff officiating.  Yes, that should have been a penalty, and yes, the B's have a legitimate complaint this time, but if St. Louis doesn't score a goal on that sequence there's no way anybody would be talking about that call this morning.  It's just one more in a long line of calls that get let go both ways in the name of "letting them play".  Usually that's just business as usual in the playoffs; it's only when a goal results from the non-call that it gets talked about like it's some big travesty.

I should add that I'm not saying that the trip shouldn't have been called, but rather I'd much prefer if the refs just called the rulebook in the same way they do in the regular season.  If you ask me, the way it is now is not only kind of dumb in general but also sets the NHL up for inevitable "controversies" like the one we saw last night.

 

 

 

9 hours ago, jennifer_rocket said:

I would prefer that the game is called the same way as well. I would be steaming if Montreal was in the Finals and someone took out Weber at the legs resulting in the game winning goal against in game five. I mean, playoff officiating just elimantes the benefit a team gets for being... well... better at hockey. Allowing the other team (or both teams in some cases) to just say "screw it" to the rule book is garbage. I mean, if one team is playing better and drawing infractions, they deserve the advantage of a powerplay. Not the disadvantage of being abused by the other team without the abusing team receiving any punishment.

The issue in my view is largely the NHL's own fault... the argument from the league is that they have the best officials in the game and that the game is just so fast that it's impossible to catch everything all the time. And at times, that may be true to some degree. You can argue that the SJ hand pass for a goal against Stl was probably missed just because no one saw it. But in a lot of these cases, like the trip last night or Debrusk's knee on Kadri or Price being run out of his crease against the Rangers a few years ago or Chara breaking Pacioretty's neck, these are plays that the ref is staring at from just a few feet away. These aren't calls that the ref didn't see, they're ones they opted not to blow down.

Now sometimes we know the ref has regret about it and goes to talk to a coach and tell him he blew it. And sometimes they give make-up calls... we've all seen the "oops, I missed that high stick or hit from behind, so here's a two minute penalty shortly after for a little nudge." But often times, the refs just play the arrogance card and refuse to admit they made a mistake. I think there are 3 problems, which you guys alluded to...

1. The league feels it puts on a better show when they "let them play." Let them hit and slash each other and get each other all riled up and stir the emotions of players and fans. Let's not break the momentum of play with whistles for penalties and powerplays - and it's true to some degree... watching the Habs kill a penalty is a giant waste of time because the odds anything good happens is minimal. There's very little enjoyment there until the PP's over. Powerplays are also pretty slow. Sure, they result in goals 20% of the time, but they're methodical plays with lots of guys standing still. You don't often see end-to-end rushes and back-and-forth play on PP's and you don't usually see guys throwing big hits or so on. They're just not that great for the entertainment factor unless you're a fan of the team on the PP. But at the end of the day, I think most fans and coaches would rather see 60 minutes of 5v5 hockey rather than each team be on the PP five times. The problem is that invoking that as a goal for officials is artificial. It allows rough, undisciplined teams to gain an advantage and in the long run, it leads to clutch-and-grab hockey if guys know they won't get called.

2. The NHL believes fairness is having both teams called for the same number of penalties. We've seen this how many times... one team gets a PP, then another one. Then there's a puck over the glass or something egregious that they have no choice but to call and suddenly one team's had 3 chances with the man up and the other has had none. 90% of the time, the next call is going the other way. Or at the very least, the team that's had the powerplays will get hooked and interfered with and nothing will get called because "that wouldn't be fair." Again, this favors the teams with less discipline. I've gone over this several times before, but the two teams having 4 powerplays each doesn't mean it was a fairly-called game. If Team A committed 10 fouls against the rulebook and Team B committed 30 and each team ended up with 4 penalties, that's a methodology that ends up largely in favor of Team B being able to slow down or hurt Team A with no repercussions. The NHL ignores this fact and instead looks at the end numbers as a sign of justice.

3. The league pansies to old-school idiots like Don Cherry and Brian Burke and Jeremy Jacobs and so on. There is an old-boys mentality here that you should be able to throw dangerous hits as part of the game, that you should be able to seek retribution, that goons who can hit but have no puck skill are valuable assets, and so on. And the league into this. The league wants those fans who love fighting and guys getting hurt and guys playing hurt and so on. How many of the idiots in the media were talking about Chara and what a star he was for playing with a presumed broken jaw? How many ex-players were saying it was Chara's job to play if it was only a matter of pain tolerance? IMO, this is just stupidity, but that's the attitude the NHL is built around. Just look at the type of ex-player they've hired for DOPS jobs... Burke, Shanahan, Pronger, Quintal, Parros... these are all guys who see no problem with violence in the game. The league might not say it publicly, but they don't mind dirty play because it keeps a part of their fanbase interested in the game (and if you can forgive me for throwing out a political analogy, it's a bit like Trump catering to a segment of his voter base that sees no problem with racism). Until the league changes its attitude about this and stops denying the concussion story and starts calling the rulebook ahead of just the entertainment factor and old-school mentality taking priority, this issue will go on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, BigTed3 said:

 

The issue in my view is largely the NHL's own fault... the argument from the league is that they have the best officials in the game and that the game is just so fast that it's impossible to catch everything all the time. And at times, that may be true to some degree. You can argue that the SJ hand pass for a goal against Stl was probably missed just because no one saw it. But in a lot of these cases, like the trip last night or Debrusk's knee on Kadri or Price being run out of his crease against the Rangers a few years ago or Chara breaking Pacioretty's neck, these are plays that the ref is staring at from just a few feet away. These aren't calls that the ref didn't see, they're ones they opted not to blow down.

Now sometimes we know the ref has regret about it and goes to talk to a coach and tell him he blew it. And sometimes they give make-up calls... we've all seen the "oops, I missed that high stick or hit from behind, so here's a two minute penalty shortly after for a little nudge." But often times, the refs just play the arrogance card and refuse to admit they made a mistake. I think there are 3 problems, which you guys alluded to...

1. The league feels it puts on a better show when they "let them play." Let them hit and slash each other and get each other all riled up and stir the emotions of players and fans. Let's not break the momentum of play with whistles for penalties and powerplays - and it's true to some degree... watching the Habs kill a penalty is a giant waste of time because the odds anything good happens is minimal. There's very little enjoyment there until the PP's over. Powerplays are also pretty slow. Sure, they result in goals 20% of the time, but they're methodical plays with lots of guys standing still. You don't often see end-to-end rushes and back-and-forth play on PP's and you don't usually see guys throwing big hits or so on. They're just not that great for the entertainment factor unless you're a fan of the team on the PP. But at the end of the day, I think most fans and coaches would rather see 60 minutes of 5v5 hockey rather than each team be on the PP five times. The problem is that invoking that as a goal for officials is artificial. It allows rough, undisciplined teams to gain an advantage and in the long run, it leads to clutch-and-grab hockey if guys know they won't get called.

2. The NHL believes fairness is having both teams called for the same number of penalties. We've seen this how many times... one team gets a PP, then another one. Then there's a puck over the glass or something egregious that they have no choice but to call and suddenly one team's had 3 chances with the man up and the other has had none. 90% of the time, the next call is going the other way. Or at the very least, the team that's had the powerplays will get hooked and interfered with and nothing will get called because "that wouldn't be fair." Again, this favors the teams with less discipline. I've gone over this several times before, but the two teams having 4 powerplays each doesn't mean it was a fairly-called game. If Team A committed 10 fouls against the rulebook and Team B committed 30 and each team ended up with 4 penalties, that's a methodology that ends up largely in favor of Team B being able to slow down or hurt Team A with no repercussions. The NHL ignores this fact and instead looks at the end numbers as a sign of justice.

3. The league pansies to old-school idiots like Don Cherry and Brian Burke and Jeremy Jacobs and so on. There is an old-boys mentality here that you should be able to throw dangerous hits as part of the game, that you should be able to seek retribution, that goons who can hit but have no puck skill are valuable assets, and so on. And the league into this. The league wants those fans who love fighting and guys getting hurt and guys playing hurt and so on. How many of the idiots in the media were talking about Chara and what a star he was for playing with a presumed broken jaw? How many ex-players were saying it was Chara's job to play if it was only a matter of pain tolerance? IMO, this is just stupidity, but that's the attitude the NHL is built around. Just look at the type of ex-player they've hired for DOPS jobs... Burke, Shanahan, Pronger, Quintal, Parros... these are all guys who see no problem with violence in the game. The league might not say it publicly, but they don't mind dirty play because it keeps a part of their fanbase interested in the game (and if you can forgive me for throwing out a political analogy, it's a bit like Trump catering to a segment of his voter base that sees no problem with racism). Until the league changes its attitude about this and stops denying the concussion story and starts calling the rulebook ahead of just the entertainment factor and old-school mentality taking priority, this issue will go on.

The biggest problem with them calling the game as per just the rule book is that on every shift they would be calling some sort of infraction or icing or offside a 3 hour game would then take 5 hours and fans would lose interest no one wants to sit through a game that has a penalty call every 30 seconds that's rediculous leave it the way it is everything already evens out in the most of the time the refs do a pretty good job of not being too one sided for the most part shit happens move on

Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, campabee82 said:

The biggest problem with them calling the game as per just the rule book is that on every shift they would be calling some sort of infraction or icing or offside a 3 hour game would then take 5 hours and fans would lose interest no one wants to sit through a game that has a penalty call every 30 seconds that's rediculous leave it the way it is everything already evens out in the most of the time the refs do a pretty good job of not being too one sided for the most part shit happens move on

No, they don't. And the objective should not be to even things out. Evening things out is the problem. The league could never make up for  the calls Tim Peel has called against the Habs.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • H_T_L unpinned and locked this topic
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...