|
Post by catnut on Feb 13, 2015 12:26:07 GMT -4
The Drakkar brass seem pretty pissed about Garland shooting. Here's the highlights of the game, I recommend opening them on Youtube and watching them at atleast 1.25 speed. The part I don't get is, did they say something when Garland was chosen? The rule seems pretty clear. Rumble talked to the refs between the OT and the shootout. I figure it's to find out if Garland was allowed according to the ref.
|
|
|
Post by Captain Obvious on Feb 13, 2015 12:28:05 GMT -4
yes thank god the D can score as Garland has 4 goals in last 17 games and barbashev has 7 in last 15...just saying that the amount they are on the ice...just watch and see if no whistles happen how long they stay on the ice...garland was on for his shift and the two lines thet came out, he was the winger as he did not go off and change You realise that when they have an assist, a goal has been scored and they contributed to the play that caused it. Garland feeds the puck to the D. Sweeney's goals are essentially as a forward, scored from his position in the slot. If Garland's long shifts were an issue, don't you think Rumble would have dealt with it? Funny how you include the 6-7 game period when Barbashev was obviously injured/fatigued after the WJHC to make your point. That was the only period since they have been on the same line that either of them had slowed down. Reading your post history, you'd think Barbashev and Garland were bringing the team down, not producing at all, causing losses. Cats are 2 points back from first overall. Garland is top scorer in the league and pulling away from the rest. Still not something that will be an issue at playoff time when games get more intense and teams get stronger. Against good teams that line has gotten scored on a ton, in large part because they take long shifts and cheat on offense. It works great against bottom feeders, not so much against the top 5-6 teams.
|
|
|
Post by Bruce Wayne on Feb 13, 2015 13:07:40 GMT -4
Scoresheet also shows he received 4 minutes in penalties, not 12. So who knows. He got 2 minors in the first and they don't count the 10-minute penalties in the PIM totals. I'm blind... just ignore me.
|
|
|
Post by oilers4ever on Feb 13, 2015 13:30:52 GMT -4
Officials really messed up on this. Can the game be protested on this?
And would Baie Comeau want to spend the fee for 1 point? They are almost definitely going to finish in 4 spot, not likely to catch the Oceanic for First in the division and are currently 7 points in front of the other non division leaders
|
|
|
Post by catnut on Feb 13, 2015 13:53:12 GMT -4
Officials really messed up on this. Can the game be protested on this? And would Baie Comeau want to spend the fee for 1 point? They are almost definitely going to finish in 4 spot, not likely to catch the Oceanic for First in the division and are currently 7 points in front of the other non division leaders 70-69=7? Must be the new math. They're only 2 back of Rimouski, would be only one with that point. Not impossible to catch up.
|
|
|
Post by oilers4ever on Feb 13, 2015 14:19:35 GMT -4
Officials really messed up on this. Can the game be protested on this? And would Baie Comeau want to spend the fee for 1 point? They are almost definitely going to finish in 4 spot, not likely to catch the Oceanic for First in the division and are currently 7 points in front of the other non division leaders 70-69=7? Must be the new math. They're only 2 back of Rimouski, would be only one with that point. Not impossible to catch up. Sorry, that is what I get for not using a calculator Rimouski has 4 games in hand, I do not think they will catch them for the division
|
|
|
Post by lirette on Feb 13, 2015 14:22:54 GMT -4
Wouldn't the cats just lose the point? I can't see how BC would be given the shootout win given that they never scored a goal in the shootout. The referees allowed this to happen, the correct thing to do would be to continue the shootout, but the logistics there wouldn't make sense obviously.
|
|
|
Post by catnut on Feb 13, 2015 14:27:29 GMT -4
Wouldn't the cats just lose the point? I can't see how BC would be given the shootout win given that they never scored a goal in the shootout. The referees allowed this to happen, the correct thing to do would be to continue the shootout, but the logistics there wouldn't make sense obviously. My thinking is, the league can't penalise the Cats (taking the point away) for a referee's mistake but since the Drakkar possibly suffered a loss because of it. I would award the 2 pts for both.
|
|
|
Post by Bruce Wayne on Feb 13, 2015 14:34:41 GMT -4
Wouldn't the cats just lose the point? I can't see how BC would be given the shootout win given that they never scored a goal in the shootout. The referees allowed this to happen, the correct thing to do would be to continue the shootout, but the logistics there wouldn't make sense obviously. My thinking is, the league can't penalise the Cats (taking the point away) for a referee's mistake but since the Drakkar possibly suffered a loss because of it. I would award the 2 pts for both. A few years back the Voltigeurs dressed 3 20 years old when one of their 20 year olds was suspended - they won the game, but the league took the win away as the Volts used an ineligible player during the game and awarded the 2 points to Moncton. I could see similar, award 1 point to Moncton for the tie, but 2 points to the Drakkars for us using an apparent ineligible Garland during the shootout. theqmjhl.ca/article/the-qmjhl-confirms-the-drummondville-voltigeurs-will-lose-two-points-in-the-standings
|
|
|
Post by catnut on Feb 13, 2015 14:39:37 GMT -4
My thinking is, the league can't penalise the Cats (taking the point away) for a referee's mistake but since the Drakkar possibly suffered a loss because of it. I would award the 2 pts for both. A few years back the Voltigeurs dressed 3 20 years old when one of their 20 year olds was suspended - they won the game, but the league took the win away as the Volts used an ineligible player during the game and awarded the 2 points to Moncton. I could see similar, award 1 point to Moncton for the tie, but 2 points to the Drakkars for us using an apparent ineligible Garland during the shootout. theqmjhl.ca/article/the-qmjhl-confirms-the-drummondville-voltigeurs-will-lose-two-points-in-the-standingsYeah but that time the refs really had no way to stop the Volts. The onus was on them. This time, Rumble asked the refs and B-C's coach did too and the refs said yes. The fault lies with the ref not one of the teams.
|
|
|
Post by Y Ddraig Goch on Feb 13, 2015 14:42:54 GMT -4
A couple of years ago Saint John played a player who hadn't signed a card or something similar against I think Gatineau. They awarded the win to Gatineau.
Bit of a different situation though from just the shootout.
|
|
|
Post by bigtimefan on Feb 13, 2015 16:14:49 GMT -4
yes thank god the D can score as Garland has 4 goals in last 17 games and barbashev has 7 in last 15...just saying that the amount they are on the ice...just watch and see if no whistles happen how long they stay on the ice...garland was on for his shift and the two lines thet came out, he was the winger as he did not go off and change 7 goals in 15 games projects to a 32 goal season in the q, what a terrible hockey player! Garland has some of the best conditioning in the league, he does take long shifts no doubt, but theres time's have seen where hes been out there for 3 minutes,and in the third minute he gets a burst of speed and draws a penalty, hard to argue with that at times..
|
|
|
Post by bigtimefan on Feb 13, 2015 16:16:54 GMT -4
sorry...dont see it as best conditioning i see it as selfish 95 points and a plus 8...yes i think its hurting the team------btw how do you know he is the best condition???lol
|
|
|
Post by bigtimefan on Feb 13, 2015 16:19:58 GMT -4
never used the word terrible...barbashev is a great player
|
|
|
Post by catnut on Feb 13, 2015 16:42:54 GMT -4
sorry...dont see it as best conditioning i see it as selfish 95 points and a plus 8...yes i think its hurting the team------btw how do you know he is the best condition???lol He does have one of the best +/- on the team. Moncton wins on special teams and he's a key player on the PP and does not play on the PK. Still don't see how he hurts the team. You really have a hate on for the guy that's helping the team be at the top of the standings, especially when you use last night's game in your argument.
|
|