Lightning Vs. Panthers- 1/29/13

[Donnie D]

I listen to a number of podcasts out of Canada and there we get discussed a lot. In fact, I would say they talk about Tampa more than just about any team - other than Toronto. They love Vinik, the drafts, the free agency signings - just about anything Steve Y. If I had $100 for every time the talk about how Tampa is building something special- I'd be retired by now. ESPN just sucks when it comes to all things hockey.

[Scobo_24]

Originally Posted by Donnie D

ESPN just sucks when it comes to all things hockey.

Yes. If you want to get a kick just listen to this espn chick calling the play by play. I seriously laughed.

might help if i posted the video:
http://espn.go.com/video/clip?id=8896227

[Hoek]

What are these podcasts? I could use a hockey one to go with the soccer podcast I listen to weekly.

[Maverick9911]

We are arguably the best team in the east and the top 4 in the NHL. All of our home games have been sell outs and we still get no recognition.

We wronged Sir Barry of Mullet, though. As long as he and his trusty steed Buccigross are there, I don't ever expect to hear much about the Bolts. The latter said he'd never forgive them, and this was before he got promoted to SportsCenter, I believe.

[Pat664422]

Originally Posted by Top Shelf

rant

Seriously, these hockey officials are acting exactly like govt officials or anyone else who gets a little power over other humans and then promptly proceeds to blur the line between staying the fuck out of the way while merely facilitating other people doing things, vs. driving the action, being the show, causing the results and making it all about them, as if they're onstage puppeteers rather than off-camera directors. Just as "regulators" and "legislators" think their job is to find something to regulate or constrain in order to justify their existence (and paychecks), referees think their job is to call penalties. Neither group seems to realize their ideal day would consist of taking no action--everyone governed themselves acceptably today. Can you imagine a modern referee feeling good about a game where he called no fouls? I can't even imagine it happening in the first place.
/rant

That was quite a rant - the only problem I have is how narrowly you represent both refs and government. You complaints against some of them are valid, but not all. Sure, refs screw up all the time. But unless you've practiced at it, you'd probably do a lot worse in real time with only what you can see from ice level. We wouldn't have a game without refs - at least, not a game with any semblance of order. And for the government bashing, same applies, there isn't a country without government. Watching a game of hockey provides the perfect demonstration as to why regulators and legislators do have full time jobs. Every game, SOME players are cheating, bending/breaking the rules and cutting corners for the sake of winning. It's the same in the business world, the news provides constant reminders of this fact. It is the truly rare day when everyone does govern themselves acceptably, especially when there is something of value at stake.

[Alex]

Originally Posted by Scobo_24

Im going to go against all here and say I have been fine with the officiating thus far. Im not saying it has been spot on but compared to the hosing we have gotten in the past this year hasnt been so bad.

my rant: The whole nhl, ESPN, TSN, aka every news outlet.
What is it with the infatuation of washington sucking and ovechkin finally getting a goal, and all the "should be top teams" that are struggling. My point is, what do we have to do to get some attention. I have been on ESPN, NHL, etc every day for each of our last wins and we have yet to make it in one of the 5 front picture news headlines. Its just dissapointing. We are arguably the best team in the east and the top 4 in the NHL. All of our home games have been sell outs and we still get no recognition.
/RANT
That is all. at least we have yzerman and Vinik.

and one last statement...
DEATH, TAXES, CONCACHER!!!

The bolded is all I care about, honestly. Fly under the radar, it's better this way.

[Top Shelf]

Originally Posted by KyleFreadrich43

Though they should get their shit together and make one specific call.

That might go down as the understatement of the millennium. Until they do get it together, fans will keep kvetching about the atrocious, embarrassing officiating. It's not just our right, it's our duty to call 'em as we sees 'em. The off-ice officials who make and refine the rules (and don't adopt modern video tech to get stuff right) are every bit as much to blame as the ones on the ice.

Thanks for posting the rules about instigating and aggressor, saved me the trouble. I've seen about three aggressor penalties called in my life, and in one of them the aggressor also was wearing a face shield! I can't remember who it was, but what a towering dumb-ass. Two for instigating, two for unsportsmanlike (instigating w/shield), two for aggressor, a five, a ten, and a game. That's 31 PMs recorded for one 10-second fight. I don't know if there's still a provision in the rules for the ref to hand out the EXTRA game misconduct, but I believe that was awarded also, or it could have been via suspension.

Not being a fighter, as a practical matter I wonder "What's a brother to do?" If you leave your headgear on, you get the penalty...and if you take a second to remove it, you risk losing the fight...or worse, getting cold-cocked while removing it. Both guys have to do it at once, which is tricky to stage at best and impossible at worst. Would any kind of penalty for fighting w/headgear work? They always drop the gloves, but those come off easily and don't break....

[KyleFreadrich43]

Originally Posted by Top Shelf

That might go down as the understatement of the millennium. Until they do get it together, fans will keep kvetching about the atrocious, embarrassing officiating. It's not just our right, it's our duty to call 'em as we sees 'em. The off-ice officials who make and refine the rules (and don't adopt modern video tech to get stuff right) are every bit as much to blame as the ones on the ice.

Thanks for posting the rules about instigating and aggressor, saved me the trouble. I've seen about three aggressor penalties called in my life, and in one of them the aggressor also was wearing a face shield! I can't remember who it was, but what a towering dumb-ass. Two for instigating, two for unsportsmanlike (instigating w/shield), two for aggressor, a five, a ten, and a game. That's 31 PMs recorded for one 10-second fight. I don't know if there's still a provision in the rules for the ref to hand out the EXTRA game misconduct, but I believe that was awarded also, or it could have been via suspension.

Not being a fighter, as a practical matter I wonder "What's a brother to do?" If you leave your headgear on, you get the penalty...and if you take a second to remove it, you risk losing the fight...or worse, getting cold-cocked while removing it. Both guys have to do it at once, which is tricky to stage at best and impossible at worst. Would any kind of penalty for fighting w/headgear work? They always drop the gloves, but those come off easily and don't break....

Most visor wearing fighters, will allow one another to remove their helmets before they start. Only on "spur of the moment" fights do the players usually not take them off.

[Top Shelf]

Right on. I thought of this option yesterday, what do you guys think:

Change the rule like this: "Instigating is defined as being the initiator of an altercation while wearing a face shield. There is no provision for a minor penalty for instigating. When a major penalty is called under this rule, the referee at his discretion may also assess a misconduct or game misconduct."

The reasoning I used was that (a) the current instigator penalty is a stupid joke which hurts the game, is despised by players, coaches and fans alike, diminishes respect among players for each other, and prevents players from policing themselves properly; and (b) if a guy starts a fight while wearing the shield, it essentially amounts to a lesser form of "intent to injure" (so, not a match penalty): you're goading the guy to punch you but he can't do it without the real risk of seriously injuring his hand on your shield. It's unsportsmanlike conduct taken to a new level by your being a chickenshit pussy. So you can do it, but your team will skate a man down for a full five, and your coach will berate you harshly. That might kill two birds at once: get rid of the dopey instigator penalty in its current form, and eliminate the practice of daring a guy to fight while hiding behind a shield, something players of a generation ago would have been embarrassed beyond belief to even think of doing

what think?

[Avery86]

Originally Posted by Hoek

What are these podcasts? I could use a hockey one to go with the soccer podcast I listen to weekly.

The Wyshynski podcast is okay, but it's a little on the goofy side.