josh Posted June 1, 2022 Share Posted June 1, 2022 Remember those cries for bigger nets? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phillyb Posted June 1, 2022 Share Posted June 1, 2022 Game be wildin Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrooksBurner Posted June 1, 2022 Share Posted June 1, 2022 I want the Oil to tie it so bad. This game deserves OT Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
josh Posted June 1, 2022 Share Posted June 1, 2022 5 minutes ago, rmc51 said: I want the Oil to tie it so bad. This game deserves OT No this game needs to end Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4EverRangerFrank Posted June 1, 2022 Share Posted June 1, 2022 Holy crap. Talk about a defensive chess match…NOT! I was pulling for EDM to tie it up late. Then let both teams self-destruct over numerous OTs. Hoping they would play until morning. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Parsley Posted June 1, 2022 Share Posted June 1, 2022 After this (expected) shootout, guess this means 1-0 or 2-1 for the Rangers game tomorrow. I’d bet the under. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
josh Posted June 1, 2022 Share Posted June 1, 2022 2 minutes ago, Parsley said: After this (expected) shootout, guess this means 1-0 or 2-1 for the Rangers game tomorrow. I’d bet the under. o/u is 5.5 on DraftKings. As much as I’d want to play the under, I think I’m picking the over in my parlay Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ozzy Posted June 1, 2022 Share Posted June 1, 2022 2 hours ago, phillyb said: The NHL’s consistency at getting any call correct is like my shits after 3/4 bottle of vodka, six White Castle burgers, and a family-sized bag of m&ms: pure liquid shitty diarrhea. This is pure gold!!! By the way, I read all the shit about that offsides rule and I still don't get it. We had the same thing with Copp being offside on a tag up and got fucked...I'm trying to find the rule, but by all accounts that is offside from what I'm reading. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keirik Posted June 1, 2022 Share Posted June 1, 2022 1 hour ago, Ozzy said: This is pure gold!!! By the way, I read all the shit about that offsides rule and I still don't get it. We had the same thing with Copp being offside on a tag up and got fucked...I'm trying to find the rule, but by all accounts that is offside from what I'm reading. What the NHL will say is the possession….and somehow Strome the other day had full possession despite being hooked and slapping at a pass to Copp that legally tagged up before touching the puck. It’s utter nonsense. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuc Posted June 1, 2022 Share Posted June 1, 2022 LMFAO at Makar "not having control of the puck" there. WTF??? He takes many strides with the puck and touches it multiple times before entering the zone. Stupidest call I've seen in a long time. Really cost the Oilers the game because instead of 2-2 they got a delay of game penalty and it was 4-2. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Valriera Posted June 1, 2022 Share Posted June 1, 2022 I woke up today and yes, Cale makar clearly has possession of the puck and yes, that play is still offside. You don’t lose possession when you stick handle. It’s an outrageous call that wound up severely impacting the course of the game. Are we implying the linesmen can slow down time now to know when the player is touching the puck while stickhandling across the blue line? So stupid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrooksBurner Posted June 1, 2022 Share Posted June 1, 2022 I don’t think it was off-side at all. It’s no different than a delayed off-side, and that gap where Makar did not have the puck on his stick, the teammate tagged up. It’s a good goal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrooksBurner Posted June 1, 2022 Share Posted June 1, 2022 8 hours ago, Keirik said: What the NHL will say is the possession….and somehow Strome the other day had full possession despite being hooked and slapping at a pass to Copp that legally tagged up before touching the puck. It’s utter nonsense. Strome didn’t have possession, but once he touched the puck before Copp had tagged up, it’s off-side. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Karan Posted June 1, 2022 Share Posted June 1, 2022 1 hour ago, rmc51 said: I don’t think it was off-side at all. It’s no different than a delayed off-side, and that gap where Makar did not have the puck on his stick, the teammate tagged up. It’s a good goal. Yeah but is the rule based on 'contact with the puck' or in 'control of the puck'? There's quite a difference between the two. Because if it's the latter, are we really sitting here saying that Makar, one of the best d-men in hockey, was not in control of that puck as he brought it into the zone? That would be laughable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ozzy Posted June 1, 2022 Share Posted June 1, 2022 (edited) I think that rule needs to be clarified a little better from the NHL. I don't think it's 100% clear. Edited June 1, 2022 by Ozzy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bugg Posted June 1, 2022 Share Posted June 1, 2022 None of that fancy defense stuff in this series. Also, no goaltending worth a damn. At this rate, both teams may be tempted to say both guys are hurt to get the Zamboni driver in there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phillyb Posted June 1, 2022 Share Posted June 1, 2022 2 hours ago, Ozzy said: I think that rule needs to be clarified a little better from the NHL. I don't think it's 100% clear. When you couple this call and the calls that went the opposite way, it just sets the precedent that the NHL and the refs can make calls as they see fit. I'm not exactly full-on tin foil hatting over here, but I'm close. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ozzy Posted June 1, 2022 Share Posted June 1, 2022 16 minutes ago, phillyb said: When you couple this call and the calls that went the opposite way, it just sets the precedent that the NHL and the refs can make calls as they see fit. I'm not exactly full-on tin foil hatting over here, but I'm close. I'm trying to make sense of how the difference between Copp's disallowed goal from last week, and this one from last night differ. I'm not seeing it. I'm thinking the rule is too "open to interpretation", which of course never bodes well for us, @phillyb Philly!! LOL 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phillyb Posted June 1, 2022 Share Posted June 1, 2022 Leaving it open for interpretation is slang for game management. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuc Posted June 1, 2022 Share Posted June 1, 2022 4 hours ago, rmc51 said: I don’t think it was off-side at all. It’s no different than a delayed off-side, and that gap where Makar did not have the puck on his stick, the teammate tagged up. It’s a good goal. How is it not offside? He had control of the puck in the neutral zone before entering the O-zone. You're saying he lost possession of the puck right before the blueline and regained it once he entered the zone? A .4s loss of possession without any players close to him? If a player stood up and hit him RIGHT at the blueline, would it be an interference penalty then? It has to be if you're saying he doesn't have possession of the puck. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Posted June 1, 2022 Share Posted June 1, 2022 5 hours ago, rmc51 said: I don’t think it was off-side at all. It’s no different than a delayed off-side, and that gap where Makar did not have the puck on his stick, the teammate tagged up. It’s a good goal. Correct based on how the rule is written, even though their expert Koho didn't even get it right or apparently know the rule because it makes no sense imo. 3 hours ago, Karan said: Yeah but is the rule based on 'contact with the puck' or in 'control of the puck'? There's quite a difference between the two. Because if it's the latter, are we really sitting here saying that Makar, one of the best d-men in hockey, was not in control of that puck as he brought it into the zone? That would be laughable. Contact. Which is what they ended up going with "according to how the rule is written" The rule was apparently changed in the last few years. The rules committee decided they needed to immediately add some more nonsense into the game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Parsley Posted June 2, 2022 Share Posted June 2, 2022 On 5/31/2022 at 11:14 PM, josh said: o/u is 5.5 on DraftKings. As much as I’d want to play the under, I think I’m picking the over in my parlay @joshGood call Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Abe Froman Posted June 3, 2022 Share Posted June 3, 2022 6-4 Avs Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
josh Posted June 3, 2022 Share Posted June 3, 2022 14 hours ago, Parsley said: @joshGood call I actually got cautious and went with 4.5. this being posted in the Avs-Oilers thread really confused me. “Who thought those games would be under 5?” But tonight’s so tight I* changed the channel. *not actually me Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Abe Froman Posted June 3, 2022 Share Posted June 3, 2022 Good night Oilers. Thanks for stopping by. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now