Shaggy
Forum Moderator
Am I a cynical idealist or an idealistic cynic?
Posts: 10,995
|
Post by Shaggy on Jan 8, 2012 11:49:49 GMT
Sorry shaggy but Danny and Steve along with the imports had poor games last night what we needed was a steady ship at the back last night someone like Kirtenbach but the imports (and brits) were headless chickens especially on the pp. I personally think if we did have another Dman import who could perform like stephenson is in sheffield (and from their own fans mouths he is holding their defence together) then it would make a huge difference. So, let me get this straight... you say that both the British and import D-men were poor last night, so having another import D would make the difference? How, exactly? If the entire D was poor, then that points to something being wrong on a team level... what would just one more import D solve? Who's to say that this extra import D-man wouldn't immediately fall prey to the same whatever-it-is that brought everyone else down last night? (Plus we'd be less one import forward to compensate... and seeing as the general opinion is that the forwards weren't cutting it either... surely weakening them would be a bad idea?)
|
|
|
Post by Panthers_44 on Jan 8, 2012 11:53:46 GMT
Hands up anyone who truly believes that just having one extra import D-man would save our season? Honestly? I'm not sure if i'm correct in saying this but perhaps it's only an import d-man most think is our only answer, me personally if there was a choice of having a rookie brit at the back to help out or having a seasoned import d-man, I would have to say I would go for the import d-man everytime and that's not to say I don't have any faith in a rookie, I just don't have any faith in our defence who seem to struggle year in and year out. Also, if we were to bring in another player, import wise, surely you wouldn't bring in an extra forward? At the start of the season I thought we had one too many, now we have two too many, so maybe that could be another reason behind having an extra import d-man, if another import is the route we are going to go down.
|
|
|
Post by Panthers_44 on Jan 8, 2012 12:04:44 GMT
what would just one more import D solve? What would just one more forward solve? But we have bought one in. (Plus we'd be less one import forward to compensate... and seeing as the general opinion is that the forwards weren't cutting it either... surely weakening them would be a bad idea?) We have in total 10 forwards, now I make that 3 lines with a floating forward so can't really see how cutting one is going to cause too much upset at least then you could have more stable lines.
|
|
|
Post by pantherdman on Jan 8, 2012 12:14:06 GMT
What did the Devils fans do? They create an atmosphere? Tut tut tut To be honest i dont know exactly but there did seem to be a lot of banter between some Devils fans and a fair few in block 4...i couldnt hear any of it as i sit the opposite side of the arena But on the whole they outsung us...it is a long time since i've heard the Devils fans that noisy at the NIC (apart from play offs and the challenge cup final a few years ago) Harmless banter like you would expect at any sports event. Devils fans were making great noise, some in block 4 were also making noise back, if only the rest of our arena would join in.
|
|
|
Post by heja on Jan 8, 2012 12:22:09 GMT
Why do people insist on going on about the number of import D-men? That's not the problem... just because a D-man is an import does not automatically mean he's going to be better than a Brit. How many import D-men have we had that couldn't match up to Danny Meyers? Or Steve Lee? According to many people on this very forum over the years, a lot. How many times have we had more import D and still failed? Any problems with the D lie in 2 areas:- - individual level... either the player is having an off night or is just not up to the job (we've heard plenty of criticism about individual performances from all of our import D this season, haven't we?) - team level... either the tactics are wrong, or the team as a whole are not executing them correctly. Hands up anyone who truly believes that just having one extra import D-man would save our season? Honestly? Steve lee was one of the biggest problems last night and this season in general has been having a pretty torrid time by his standards Danny Meyers should be playing 15mins max per game rather than the 25 30 mins he does a night Danny Meyers is a relatively good damn but he gets way to much ice time
|
|
|
Post by heja on Jan 8, 2012 12:30:21 GMT
A good game of hockey and a clinical display by the Devils, they played a good road game and punished every mistake we made. Much like the last home loss to Coventry, we made poor defensive errors, bad turnovers, poor passing, bad positioning, Dmen pinching in at the wrong time and someone really needs to sit Stevie Lee down and tell him to play his position, instead of going for a big hit on the boards and giving up an odd man rush. I've said since the start of the season I wish we had 4 import Dmen, as Neilson, Wilson, Lepine aren't good enough defensively to only have 3. Lepine should be the 4th import Dman, with Neilson and two quality Dmen as our first choice pair. I'm delighted to see Macca back and he was our best player last night, but scoring goals isn't our weakness, the defense is. Once again we've failed to strengthen the right area and show we're serious about the league. The buck for that stops with CN and GM. Are they more interested in titles or shirt sales and bums on seats? I'd agree with you there Cookies. Going with just 3 import D each season is part of your downfall and something Corey just doesn't seem to want to move away from. Also, as you have suggested, whilst Lepine is a great enforcer type player, he plays in the wrong position to do this with only 3 imports on D. He's also not the best D man in the world. Your season is no way over but Belfast are creating a gap at the top again that is going to be difficult to overcome as the games start to run out. Lepine is a much better dmen than you give him credit for he's a very good skater for his size and also very quick
|
|
|
Post by pantherdman on Jan 8, 2012 12:30:31 GMT
Hate to say I told you so..... +1 it's only 2 losses and shocking performances in a row, to 2 mid table teams. whats wrong with you? I hope you stayed and clapped them off at the end, you'll be blaspheming next! ;D Diabolical! How can a player who has been retired 2 years, just roll up and be the best player on the ice??? what the.... do we do all week in training? Out hustled and out worked, Devils played as a team and with heart, thats why they won. They are a very average team this year just like the Clan, yet we have lost to both, what does that make us?? Carson stunk nearly as bad as us, glad to see the league has seen sense and abolished the instigator rule. good work. No excuses but bring back hicks and darnel all is forgiven at least they call it as they see it, not 30 seconds later after being bleated at. I'm not bothering next week, first game i've missed through choice for 5 years, hope more of our fans do the same, it's the only way it will change as all the org cares about is £££.
|
|
Mark
Randall Weber
Experience has taught me that when it really matters the only person you can rely on is yourself.
Posts: 4,616
|
Post by Mark on Jan 8, 2012 12:31:21 GMT
Steve Lee let's opposition players by him on the boards without anything like a challenge. He might as well lay his shirt on the ice for them to skate over. What's happened to him?
On saying that the entire defence was a joke last night, lost count of all the mistakes they made.
|
|
|
Post by Panthers_44 on Jan 8, 2012 12:40:31 GMT
Why do people insist on going on about the number of import D-men? That's not the problem... just because a D-man is an import does not automatically mean he's going to be better than a Brit. How many import D-men have we had that couldn't match up to Danny Meyers? Or Steve Lee? According to many people on this very forum over the years, a lot. How many times have we had more import D and still failed? Any problems with the D lie in 2 areas:- - individual level... either the player is having an off night or is just not up to the job (we've heard plenty of criticism about individual performances from all of our import D this season, haven't we?) - team level... either the tactics are wrong, or the team as a whole are not executing them correctly. Hands up anyone who truly believes that just having one extra import D-man would save our season? Honestly? Steve lee was one of the biggest problems last night and this season in general has been having a pretty torrid time by his standards Danny Meyers should be playing 15mins max per game rather than the 25 30 mins he does a night Danny Meyers is a relatively good damn but he gets way to much ice time I think this is probably why I think we could do with another d-man, fatigue has got to set in somewhere playing so many minutes.
|
|
|
Post by robbo2306 on Jan 8, 2012 13:31:29 GMT
Sorry shaggy but Danny and Steve along with the imports had poor games last night what we needed was a steady ship at the back last night someone like Kirtenbach but the imports (and brits) were headless chickens especially on the pp. I personally think if we did have another Dman import who could perform like stephenson is in sheffield (and from their own fans mouths he is holding their defence together) then it would make a huge difference. So, let me get this straight... you say that both the British and import D-men were poor last night, so having another import D would make the difference? How, exactly? If the entire D was poor, then that points to something being wrong on a team level... what would just one more import D solve? Who's to say that this extra import D-man wouldn't immediately fall prey to the same whatever-it-is that brought everyone else down last night? (Plus we'd be less one import forward to compensate... and seeing as the general opinion is that the forwards weren't cutting it either... surely weakening them would be a bad idea?) Dave, I think you are underestimating the importance of a strong D over the course of a whole season. Going with 3 import D and one of them being your enforcer is where you are going wrong imo. Look at all the teams that win the league, it's based on strong goaltending and solid D. I'm not sure a team with only 3 import D man can last the season challenging for the big prize. You place far too much emphasis season after season on scoring goals. Whilst that's great entertainment and it obviously get's the crowds in it ultimately falls short on what really matters for a sports team, the league title. Being in the black at the bank only matters to Neil Black (pardon the pun). Look at the Sheffield D from last season, they made a decentish goaltender look great and eventually won us the league. I'm sorry but Meyers and Lee are nowhere near a Munn/Bolibruck/Sarich/Domish. I don't think it's any co-incidence that when Kowlaski has a dip in form (as all goaltenders do) you start to lose games. I think you would have been far better off looking for a good quality stay at home D man instead of Mcaslan. For what it's worth, I think with the loss of Sarich, our D isn't up to the job now. It's not over but you need something from Cardiff tonight I think.
|
|
|
Post by robbo2306 on Jan 8, 2012 13:33:27 GMT
I'd agree with you there Cookies. Going with just 3 import D each season is part of your downfall and something Corey just doesn't seem to want to move away from. Also, as you have suggested, whilst Lepine is a great enforcer type player, he plays in the wrong position to do this with only 3 imports on D. He's also not the best D man in the world. Your season is no way over but Belfast are creating a gap at the top again that is going to be difficult to overcome as the games start to run out. Lepine is a much better dmen than you give him credit for he's a very good skater for his size and also very quick He's a decent D man but he's not a Matt Stephenson/Steve Munn type player. If you are going with only 3 then you need that quality in all three imo.
|
|
|
Post by heja on Jan 8, 2012 13:48:31 GMT
Lepine is a much better dmen than you give him credit for he's a very good skater for his size and also very quick He's a decent D man but he's not a Matt Stephenson/Steve Munn type player. If you are going with only 3 then you need that quality in all three imo. He's still only pretty young though at 24 got his whole career ahead of him yet and is still developing from a pure fighter in the echl to a quality defencman
|
|
|
Post by pantherdman on Jan 8, 2012 14:14:58 GMT
Shockingly, I totally agree with Robbo2306.
|
|
john
Jade Galbraith
Posts: 2
|
Post by john on Jan 8, 2012 14:26:08 GMT
Offence wins games. Defence wins championships.
Wilson seems to be pretty solid from what I've seen. Neilson and Lepine are more suspect defensively. Another solid player at the back would make a lot of difference in my view.
|
|
|
Post by panthersdave on Jan 8, 2012 14:40:03 GMT
Right, I will pre-warn that this is going to be a post about Carson - this is by no-means me saying that he lost us the game, I dont think he had that much of a bearing. My girlfriend called it after a minute of the game saying we werent playing well, she was right, we were abysmal.
What I dont understand is the calls for checking to the head and high sticking.
Firslty the checking to the head by Steve Lee, my take on it was that it looked like a good, hard but clean hit. The problem was the Devils player seemed to collide with the linesman and his helmet fell off. This perhaps made the hit look worse that it was. What are peoples thoughts?
Secondly, and more of a bug bear for me was the high stick 2+2 for Lepine. It looked to me like the player had his head quite low or was off balance and falling forward when the incident took place, I immediately looked to Carson and he hadnt made the call. Play went on for some 5 seconds and I was still watching Carson - no call.
Suddenly there was a fight and the Devils player goes to Carson showing him his bleeding face, then Lepine gets called for high sticks.
My question is this: Is this an example of Carson penalising the result of an incident or does a player getting an injury from a stick warrant a high stick call regardless of the position of the stick and player?
|
|
|
Post by gcmandrake on Jan 8, 2012 15:23:57 GMT
Right, I will pre-warn that this is going to be a post about Carson - this is by no-means me saying that he lost us the game, I dont think he had that much of a bearing. My girlfriend called it after a minute of the game saying we werent playing well, she was right, we were abysmal. What I dont understand is the calls for checking to the head and high sticking. Firslty the checking to the head by Steve Lee, my take on it was that it looked like a good, hard but clean hit. The problem was the Devils player seemed to collide with the linesman and his helmet fell off. This perhaps made the hit look worse that it was. What are peoples thoughts? Secondly, and more of a bug bear for me was the high stick 2+2 for Lepine. It looked to me like the player had his head quite low or was off balance and falling forward when the incident took place, I immediately looked to Carson and he hadnt made the call. Play went on for some 5 seconds and I was still watching Carson - no call. Suddenly there was a fight and the Devils player goes to Carson showing him his bleeding face, then Lepine gets called for high sticks. My question is this: Is this an example of Carson penalising the result of an incident or does a player getting an injury from a stick warrant a high stick call regardless of the position of the stick and player? When a player is bleeding like that, the ref has to make a call. I honestly can't argue with that one, Lepine must have made some contact with his stick. The Lee incident however, looked to me like a valid check, where the checkee hit his head on the plexi while falling over and that's what dislodged his helmet. I'd love to see it again and see if I'm right, but it simply looked like an improperly secured helmet.
|
|
|
Post by panthersdave on Jan 8, 2012 15:33:03 GMT
Right, I will pre-warn that this is going to be a post about Carson - this is by no-means me saying that he lost us the game, I dont think he had that much of a bearing. My girlfriend called it after a minute of the game saying we werent playing well, she was right, we were abysmal. What I dont understand is the calls for checking to the head and high sticking. Firslty the checking to the head by Steve Lee, my take on it was that it looked like a good, hard but clean hit. The problem was the Devils player seemed to collide with the linesman and his helmet fell off. This perhaps made the hit look worse that it was. What are peoples thoughts? Secondly, and more of a bug bear for me was the high stick 2+2 for Lepine. It looked to me like the player had his head quite low or was off balance and falling forward when the incident took place, I immediately looked to Carson and he hadnt made the call. Play went on for some 5 seconds and I was still watching Carson - no call. Suddenly there was a fight and the Devils player goes to Carson showing him his bleeding face, then Lepine gets called for high sticks. My question is this: Is this an example of Carson penalising the result of an incident or does a player getting an injury from a stick warrant a high stick call regardless of the position of the stick and player? When a player is bleeding like that, the ref has to make a call. I honestly can't argue with that one, Lepine must have made some contact with his stick. The Lee incident however, looked to me like a valid check, where the checkee hit his head on the plexi while falling over and that's what dislodged his helmet. I'd love to see it again and see if I'm right, but it simply looked like an improperly secured helmet. Thanks for the clarification.
|
|
|
Post by richard1969 on Jan 8, 2012 15:43:18 GMT
Right, I will pre-warn that this is going to be a post about Carson - this is by no-means me saying that he lost us the game, I dont think he had that much of a bearing. My girlfriend called it after a minute of the game saying we werent playing well, she was right, we were abysmal. What I dont understand is the calls for checking to the head and high sticking. Firslty the checking to the head by Steve Lee, my take on it was that it looked like a good, hard but clean hit. The problem was the Devils player seemed to collide with the linesman and his helmet fell off. This perhaps made the hit look worse that it was. What are peoples thoughts? Secondly, and more of a bug bear for me was the high stick 2+2 for Lepine. It looked to me like the player had his head quite low or was off balance and falling forward when the incident took place, I immediately looked to Carson and he hadnt made the call. Play went on for some 5 seconds and I was still watching Carson - no call. Suddenly there was a fight and the Devils player goes to Carson showing him his bleeding face, then Lepine gets called for high sticks. My question is this: Is this an example of Carson penalising the result of an incident or does a player getting an injury from a stick warrant a high stick call regardless of the position of the stick and player? When a player is bleeding like that, the ref has to make a call. I honestly can't argue with that one, Lepine must have made some contact with his stick. . He fell onto the stick and I reckon it was about knee height when it hit his face - it was also called as accidental ?? so how can you get a penalty if its accidental ?
|
|
Outlaw
Lorne Smith
JUST LIKE JESSE JAMES,.......
Posts: 729
|
Post by Outlaw on Jan 8, 2012 15:52:38 GMT
The high sticking may be accidental, but as the player is responsible for the position of his stick at all times, the call is there to penalise them for not having control of their stick.
|
|
|
Post by Spoonerdudes on Jan 8, 2012 15:53:50 GMT
A player must be control of his stick at all times, ie in case It's in the position where it might strike someone
|
|
|
Post by heja on Jan 8, 2012 15:56:03 GMT
When a player is bleeding like that, the ref has to make a call. I honestly can't argue with that one, Lepine must have made some contact with his stick. . He fell onto the stick and I reckon it was about knee height when it hit his face - it was also called as accidental ?? so how can you get a penalty if its accidental ? Because you have to be in control of your stick at all times, a highstick is not to do with the hieght of the stick unless it involves playing the puck eg a tip in which it has to be below the height of the goal or just generally playing the puck which has to be done below the height of the shoulder of the person playing the puck. The accidental is what stops him getting a game or match penalty Blood or injury obviously gets you an extra 2 mins You could have your nose touching the ice and still receive a highstick You can't be called for highsticks if it happens as a result of a follow through while shooting/passing the puck though.
|
|
|
Post by dill1015 on Jan 8, 2012 16:00:51 GMT
Right, I will pre-warn that this is going to be a post about Carson - this is by no-means me saying that he lost us the game, I dont think he had that much of a bearing. My girlfriend called it after a minute of the game saying we werent playing well, she was right, we were abysmal. What I dont understand is the calls for checking to the head and high sticking. Firslty the checking to the head by Steve Lee, my take on it was that it looked like a good, hard but clean hit. The problem was the Devils player seemed to collide with the linesman and his helmet fell off. This perhaps made the hit look worse that it was. What are peoples thoughts? Secondly, and more of a bug bear for me was the high stick 2+2 for Lepine. It looked to me like the player had his head quite low or was off balance and falling forward when the incident took place, I immediately looked to Carson and he hadnt made the call. Play went on for some 5 seconds and I was still watching Carson - no call. Suddenly there was a fight and the Devils player goes to Carson showing him his bleeding face, then Lepine gets called for high sticks. My question is this: Is this an example of Carson penalising the result of an incident or does a player getting an injury from a stick warrant a high stick call regardless of the position of the stick and player? 100% agree about the Lee incident. Lee made no contact with the head, bad call. The lepine one is a bit harder to say, for me the devils player (adams i think) went very low, well below waist height. i dont know about the letter of the law, but imo if a player puts himself down there and gets clipped in the face he's kinda askin for it. and its not really lepines fault as he kept his stick well down towards the ice. The worse thing for me about both cases is the way carson's opinion seems to have been affected long after the actions took place either by crowds or players. Ref's should make consistant desicions and stick to them. If he does not call something he was watching at the time, he should not go back afterwards and call it simply because a player has a cut, lost his helmet or a teammate has a fight with the opposing player. These things do not automatically mean it was worthy of a penalty.
|
|
|
Post by richard1969 on Jan 8, 2012 16:03:09 GMT
Well in fairness the devils player thought Lepine could have avoided the contact hence the fight - he was probably right I dont think Lepine went out of his way to stop the stick hitting the other guys face as he fell forwards tbh
|
|
|
Post by LooseChippings on Jan 8, 2012 16:05:06 GMT
... snip ... so how can you get a penalty if its accidental ? Have a read of the Rulebook 530 - HIGH STICKING
|
|
Yotes
Forum Admin
Posts: 16,425
|
Post by Yotes on Jan 8, 2012 16:35:20 GMT
I thought it was the most blatant high stick you'll ever see personally, the only odd thing was no call to begin with from Carson and the play continued for a while. I assume his linesmen reported it after the fight, but can they not whistle the play dead when they think the ref's missed one? (Genuine question that, I've no idea).
|
|