brianvf Posted January 1, 2015 Posted January 1, 2015 Wow, that Domi is a little punk. I am stunned that the goalie interference goal counted. Ridiculous. Quote
brianvf Posted January 1, 2015 Posted January 1, 2015 How many metals osecki got? How many blais got ? Blais already has enough to worry about with his team getting smoked by a bad UNH team today... Quote
MafiaMan Posted January 1, 2015 Posted January 1, 2015 Medal round quarterfinals: Canada vs Denmark Sweden vs Finland/Germany winner USA vs Russia Czech Republic vs Slovakia Quote
crb1 Posted January 1, 2015 Posted January 1, 2015 I am stunned that the goalie interference goal counted. Ridiculous. I could not believe they let that goal stand. That was crazy, clearly the Canadian player interfered. Quote
farce poobah Posted January 1, 2015 Posted January 1, 2015 Medal round quarterfinals: Canada vs Denmark Sweden vs Finland/Germany winner USA vs Russia Czech Republic vs Slovakia Except for Denmark V Canada, Those are some serious rivalry games. Quote
MafiaMan Posted January 1, 2015 Posted January 1, 2015 Except for Denmark V Canada, Those are some serious rivalry games. As much as I'd like to see Germany beat Finland, I just can't see the Germans beating Sweden in the next round. Quote
MafiaMan Posted January 1, 2015 Posted January 1, 2015 2-0 Finland with 5:30 left in the 2nd. Germany just doesn't have the offense to score 3 goals and win this thing. Quote
Godsmack Posted January 1, 2015 Posted January 1, 2015 I just finished watching the game and, well, I feel a bit cheated. No way should that third goal should have counted. Quote
Fetch Posted January 1, 2015 Posted January 1, 2015 It was just irritating listening to the announcers saying you cant be in that blue paint and interfear with the goalie, when that is exactly how the canads just scored This^ Quote
MafiaMan Posted January 1, 2015 Posted January 1, 2015 Still 2-0 Finland...8:50 remaining. Looks like Switzerland will get Germany in the relegation round, a best-of-three set starting on Friday. The winner stays...loser heads down to Division IA next year. Belarus will be a newcomer at this tournament next year as well. Quote
MafiaMan Posted January 1, 2015 Posted January 1, 2015 Germany with great pressure on a PP...but still 2-0 with 3:05 left in the game. Quote
brianvf Posted January 1, 2015 Posted January 1, 2015 I could not believe they let that goal stand. That was crazy, clearly the Canadian player interfered. I guess it's hard for the refs to call it a no goal being that it was Team Canada...in Canada. That was a no-win situation for the USA. Quote
MafiaMan Posted January 1, 2015 Posted January 1, 2015 Finland 2 Germany 0. Final. Medal round quarterfinals: Canada vs Denmark Sweden vs Finland USA vs Russia Czech Republic vs Slovakia Quote
NoDakFan Posted January 1, 2015 Posted January 1, 2015 I guess it's hard for the refs to call it a no goal being that it was Team Canada...in Canada. That was a no-win situation for the USA. Why, so they can be booed? Refs should not play favorites for who's home just because they are afraid of getting ridiculed. It's gonna happen anyways. Quote
siouxweet Posted January 1, 2015 Posted January 1, 2015 how come the US and Canada are always in the same bracket or group at the world juniors? Quote
MafiaMan Posted January 1, 2015 Posted January 1, 2015 how come the US and Canada are always in the same bracket or group at the world juniors? Pools are based on last year's results, hence you see #1 Finland in one pool and #2 Sweden in the other. #3 Russia goes into the pool with #2 and #'s 4 and 5 join #1. Canada was 4th last year and USA was 5th. Quote
Emerald joker Posted January 1, 2015 Posted January 1, 2015 So what are the rules for goalie interfarence, anyone? I just thought you couldnt be in the blue paint sense the ref stopped the play when the US player was in it and the canads player clearly touched Demko, can any one explain this? Goon? Quote
MafiaMan Posted January 1, 2015 Posted January 1, 2015 So what are the rules for goalie interfarence, anyone? I just thought you couldnt be in the blue paint sense the ref stopped the play when the US player was in it and the canads player clearly touched Demko, can any one explain this? Goon? The puck was inside the blue paint before the Canada player was is how the referee interpreted the play. However, just because the puck is inside the area doesn't mean the opposition can shove the goalie with the purpose of pushing the puck across the goal line. Quote
scpa0305 Posted January 1, 2015 Posted January 1, 2015 The puck was inside the blue paint before the Canada player was is how the referee interpreted the play. However, just because the puck is inside the area doesn't mean the opposition can shove the goalie with the purpose of pushing the puck across the goal line. Starman explained the call on Twitter. Pretty much the initial call stands unless there was obvious evidence the puck didn't cross the line. Goalie interference itself isn't reviewable I think Quote
MafiaMan Posted January 1, 2015 Posted January 1, 2015 Starman explained the call on Twitter. Pretty much the initial call stands unless there was obvious evidence the puck didn't cross the line. Goalie interference itself isn't reviewable I think So, going forward for team USA, get the puck in the crease and have someone pummel the goalie and get the puck across the goal line by any means possible. Good goal. Quote
The Sicatoka Posted January 1, 2015 Posted January 1, 2015 So, going forward for team USA, get the puck in the crease and have someone pummel the goalie and get the puck across the goal line by any means possible. Good goal. I give you a copy of the game plan in confidence and you go and do this ... < sigh > ... Quote
Blackheart Posted January 1, 2015 Posted January 1, 2015 So, going forward for team USA, get the puck in the crease and have someone pummel the goalie and get the puck across the goal line by any means possible. Good goal.hey, it worked in Sega's NHL94... Quote
sioux rube Posted January 1, 2015 Posted January 1, 2015 Starman explained the call on Twitter. Pretty much the initial call stands unless there was obvious evidence the puck didn't cross the line. Goalie interference itself isn't reviewable I thinkYep cannot be reviewed which is complete BS. From now on crash the net and crash it hard. Quote
scpa0305 Posted January 1, 2015 Posted January 1, 2015 So, going forward for team USA, get the puck in the crease and have someone pummel the goalie and get the puck across the goal line by any means possible. Good goal. I agree that should have been a no goal, per International rules. That his a goal in the NHL though. Tendy barely was touched. But again, per iihf rules I do think that should have been a no goal. Unfortunate and that was terrible timing. Haha pummel is a stretch Quote
Sioux_Hab-it Posted January 1, 2015 Posted January 1, 2015 Unfortunately this is a lot like reading a Maple Leafs thread following most of their games which in summary typically read: "It must have been the officiating because there is no way that giving up 41 shots should have cost us the game". Some of you might not like my opinion; however I would offer that your D is not as strong as in past years and some of the forwards are not playing good two way hockey. Unless the forwards can compensate a bit so that the US plays less time in their own zone you will have a tough time getting through both the Russians and Swedes. 2 Quote
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.