Jump to content
SiouxSports.com Forum

SIOUX vs. Denver - SATURDAY Gameday


AZSIOUX

Recommended Posts

$1M question from a not so great hockey mind; intent to blow the whistle for what reason? Was the ref about to call a penalty, did he lose sight of the puck,...? Did they give an official reason as to why there "was intent to blow the whistle"? There had to be a reason unless it's an outright lie.

Watch the Hak postgame interview. He was told by the referee that he didn't see the puck in the net, not the "intent to blow the whistle" excuse.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Watch the Hak postgame interview. He was told by the referee that he didn't see the puck in the net, not the "intent to blow the whistle" excuse.

 

Does that mean that the ref did not see it on the replay?  Wow.  I could even see it on the overhead view next to  the goalies' leg. And if he didn't see it in real time, it's because he didn't look where Gaarder was pointing. I guess.  That's just a crazy explaination.  Replay should have fixed that.  And if you watch the replay with a behind the net view, it almost looks as though the ref is signaling a goal before he grabs the back of the net.  Right about the time the puck is sliding along the goalies' leg.  Really poor review, but water under the bridge.  If we get DU at the Target Center this will be good incentive to set the record straight.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Does that mean that the ref did not see it on the replay? Wow. I could even see it on the overhead view next to the goalies' leg. And if he didn't see it in real time, it's because he didn't look where Gaarder was pointing. I guess. That's just a crazy explaination. Replay should have fixed that. And if you watch the replay with a behind the net view, it almost looks as though the ref is signaling a goal before he grabs the back of the net. Right about the time the puck is sliding along the goalies' leg. Really poor review, but water under the bridge. If we get DU at the Target Center this will be good incentive to set the record straight.

I agree, and even more strange, the replay shows him bending over the net, looking exactly where Gaarder is pointing. Lends credence to the comment that pucks aren't in Braille.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's exacty what I compared it to. Seguins just happened to result in an injury. Moore should sit next game imho.

Drake's jump as the clip occurs probably prevented a knee injury like Seguin's. Doesn't make the low hit less cheap though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree, and even more strange, the replay shows him bending over the net, looking exactly where Gaarder is pointing. Lends credence to the comment that pucks aren't in Braille.

It's one of those mysterious time-delay things.  They didn't see the puck bouncing around in the net until time was about to expire in OT.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

on the OT thing, I only saw DU players celebrating, did the refs signal a goal or look at a review?

 

The refs indeed signaled a goal when they say the DU players celebrating even though the puck was no longer in the rink. But when the puck is in the goal, they waive it off... Haha

 

Is there a rule at all that the officials must see the puck in the net to rule a goal? Because he did indeed signal a goal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is there a rule at all that the officials must see the puck in the net to rule a goal? Because he did indeed signal a goal.

Yes, they must see the puck cross the goal line, then point to signal goal. I don't think he saw this one.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On a separate subject.  I really don't like how we have our lines set up.  1.  I'm still not a huge fan of Mattson.  I know he has played decently well as of late but I still don't feel comfortable with him on the ice.  2. I love Poolman but I hate him on the Park-Mac line.  I want to see one of the following two line combinations:

 

#15-#16-#08

#29-#09-#27

#03-#28-#17

#21-#13-#14

 

#04-#24

#02-#06

#20-#05

 

Or

 

#15-#16-#08

#29-#09-#27

#11-#28-#17

#21-#13-#14

 

#04-#24

#02-#06

#20-#03

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On a separate subject. I really don't like how we have our lines set up. 1. I'm still not a huge fan of Mattson. I know he has played decently well as of late but I still don't feel comfortable with him on the ice. 2. I love Poolman but I hate him on the Park-Mac line. I want to see one of the following two line combinations:

#15-#16-#08

#29-#09-#27

#03-#28-#17

#21-#13-#14

#04-#24

#02-#06

#20-#05

Or

#15-#16-#08

#29-#09-#27

#11-#28-#17

#21-#13-#14

#04-#24

#02-#06

#20-#03

I really like those lines however I think a Olson or Simonson may work better than at Clair. Also, I think mattson has been solid.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I really like those lines however I think a Olson or Simonson may work better than at Clair. Also, I think mattson has been solid.

If healthy no way Colton sits from here on out. He is great on the PK and great on the walls and good in the D end.

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.

×
×
  • Create New...