|
Post by Dirty Afanasenkov on Dec 11, 2006 13:13:51 GMT -5
This being said, from what I've seen, Roy will yell a the ref at the end of every loss. It's something the league should look into. That won't happen - Roy and Courteau are buddies. Getting back to the Sheppard hit on Pianosi - I saw the replay as well Jimmy, I did not see any elbow. I did see a checking from behind penalty, but not an elbowing penalty.
|
|
|
Post by chaos12 on Dec 11, 2006 14:35:41 GMT -5
ok this is gone on long enough i saw the replay as well either way it was a penalty on sheppard so why complain... elbow whatever it was still a penalty no matter what... im tired of seeing a whole thread about arguing a penalty that is penalty but it just another type like crosschecking/boarding or whatever call it was.
|
|
|
Post by SteveUL on Dec 11, 2006 14:55:25 GMT -5
ok this is gone on long enough i saw the replay as well either way it was a penalty on sheppard so why complain... elbow whatever it was still a penalty no matter what... im tired of seeing a whole thread about arguing a penalty that is penalty but it just another type like crosschecking/boarding or whatever call it was. So then what was it if it was a penalty ... it wasn't elbowing but thats what got called. You say it was a penalty but don't tell us why you think it was. Stop making empty headed posts.
|
|
|
Post by Sec21critic on Dec 11, 2006 17:30:50 GMT -5
ok this is gone on long enough i saw the replay as well either way it was a penalty on sheppard so why complain... elbow whatever it was still a penalty no matter what... im tired of seeing a whole thread about arguing a penalty that is penalty but it just another type like crosschecking/boarding or whatever call it was. Actually, alot of this thread was dedicated to Quebec's plans for the future, Roy conduct with the refs, the third Moncton goal and the status of Billy Bezeau. You're just whining for the sake of whining.
|
|
|
Post by Sec21critic on Dec 11, 2006 17:53:12 GMT -5
Also, to respond to much of what has been written.
- Bezeau is indeed still on the active roster... took a couple of penalties yesterday.
- Another thing that could hold Esposito back from the NHL this year is the new CBA. As we saw with Jordan Stall, you basically have to give the team that drafts you every reasoN NOT to send you back. A team like the Blues that is building a number of years into the future may not want to rush Esposito's development if they were to draft him.
- I too thought the third goal was tipped by Marquardt. Thinking back now though the trajectory of the puck in the replay from over the net would indicate it was tipped before it got to the front of the net however.
- Roy will always have his say with the refs.... things won't nessecarily go his way, but it's just his nature to do so, I think.
- The Sheppard penalty: wether it was elbowing or not, it looked like he was going in with the elbow up... he just didn't make contact with it (thankfully). It may not've been an elbowing penalty... but it was a damned good attempt at one. It was a fairly nasty hit though and warranted a penalty, IMO.
|
|
|
Post by forrest on Dec 12, 2006 7:40:43 GMT -5
- The Sheppard penalty: wether it was elbowing or not, it looked like he was going in with the elbow up... he just didn't make contact with it (thankfully). It may not've been an elbowing penalty... but it was a damned good attempt at one. It was a fairly nasty hit though and warranted a penalty, IMO. Same thing as when someone hooks another player on the ankle. Ref often make mistake in that call and they call it tripping.
|
|
|
Post by SteveUL on Dec 12, 2006 7:43:16 GMT -5
- The Sheppard penalty: wether it was elbowing or not, it looked like he was going in with the elbow up... he just didn't make contact with it (thankfully). It may not've been an elbowing penalty... but it was a damned good attempt at one. It was a fairly nasty hit though and warranted a penalty, IMO. Same thing as when someone hooks another player on the ankle. Ref often make mistake in that call and they call it tripping. If the guy tripped ... then it was tripping ... should he get 4:00 if he falls from being hooked on the ankle ?
|
|
|
Post by forrest on Dec 12, 2006 7:44:43 GMT -5
Same thing as when someone hooks another player on the ankle. Ref often make mistake in that call and they call it tripping. If the guy tripped ... then it was tripping ... should he get 4:00 if he falls from being hooked on the ankle ? Sorry Steve I forgot the sarcasm emoticon in my post. I know you rely on those a lot to understand the context.
|
|
|
Post by SteveUL on Dec 12, 2006 7:58:32 GMT -5
If the guy tripped ... then it was tripping ... should he get 4:00 if he falls from being hooked on the ankle ? Sorry Steve I forgot the sarcasm emoticon in my post. I know you rely on those a lot to understand the context. Its easier to grasp when the post is made by an intelligent person ... with posts by halfwits we cannot simply assume sarcasm. (no emoticon selected)
|
|
|
Post by Porkchop on Dec 12, 2006 17:59:22 GMT -5
Sorry Steve I forgot the sarcasm emoticon in my post. I know you rely on those a lot to understand the context. Its easier to grasp when the post is made by an intelligent person ... with posts by halfwits we cannot simply assume sarcasm. (no emoticon selected) So what is the case with this post?........should I assume sarcasm or not?
|
|
|
Post by SteveUL on Dec 12, 2006 19:23:41 GMT -5
Its easier to grasp when the post is made by an intelligent person ... with posts by halfwits we cannot simply assume sarcasm. (no emoticon selected) So what is the case with this post?........should I assume sarcasm or not? If you have to ask ... then we know where you fit in.
|
|
|
Post by Porkchop on Dec 12, 2006 21:20:59 GMT -5
So what is the case with this post?........should I assume sarcasm or not? If you have to ask ... then we know where you fit in. So what is the case with this post?........should I assume sarcasm or not?
|
|