cb93
Jade Galbraith
Posts: 68
|
Post by cb93 on Dec 28, 2014 17:02:27 GMT
What did he say? I was at the game so didn't see it on tele. Something along the lines of "campaign about mental illness, I keep sending Simms the leaflets but he hasn't got the messege yet" Not too far off calling us B's over the tannoy but hey, GM is the devil right. Eh, it's just a joke. Some steelers fans lacking a sense of humour this weekend. Mind you so would I if it was the panthers who lost twice in a row to our rivals.
|
|
|
Post by rnewbolt1 on Dec 28, 2014 17:11:44 GMT
No Steelers fans are educated people!
|
|
|
Post by jd on Dec 28, 2014 17:17:36 GMT
The use of a comma might be needed in that statement
|
|
|
Post by bobness on Dec 28, 2014 17:37:50 GMT
I have tried to say similar on another Facebook page to someone but am getting flamed for it.Is my only thought also that Panthers would get NO advantage if a penalty in ordinary play is taken as a 4 on 3 in the OT period. Imagine if it was 4 on 3 and Steelers were assessed another penalty in OT. Apart from the game THEN going to 5 on 3 (which would seem odd from a 4 on 4 start) we'd lose out as the 2nd Steelers penalty would just sit and another man from the bench would play to avoid a 4 on 2 situation.No advantage to us and this would happen all game till the end.....Doing it 5 on 4 allows us to get a reward for another penalty (5 on 3) as opposed to Sheffield NOT being penalised in OT. Seems a fair solution, obviously the officials do know the rules, but rarely implement them, zero tolerance springs to mind. I'm not sure why it went to 5 on 4 in OT, rather than 4 on 3, but I'm guessing that "carried over" penalties are served and played as "normal" this year? If we'd not scored, I guess we would have played 5 on 5 when the penalty expired, until the next whistle, when it would have then been then 4 on 4 as "normal" OT. Also, not sure why Sheffield would ever not get penalised if taking a minor in OT? If it was 4 on 3 in OT and another penalty was taken by Steelers, then it becomes 5 on 3, then the first penalised player returns to the ice if the first penalty is killed, making it 5 on 4, until the next whistle, when it returns to 4 on 3 for the next face off, for the remainder of the second minor, when it returns to 4 on 4. There's no chance that Sheffield would ever have "not got penalised" had they taken a minor in OT?
|
|
Shaggy
Forum Moderator
Am I a cynical idealist or an idealistic cynic?
Posts: 10,995
|
Post by Shaggy on Dec 28, 2014 17:39:14 GMT
The use of a comma might be needed in that statement Oh, I dunno...
|
|
|
Post by wgray on Dec 28, 2014 18:09:39 GMT
Don't think Modig deserved man of the match last night, don't particularly think he had an outstanding match, I would personally have given it Landry
|
|
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 Dec 28, 2014 18:31:56 GMT
No Steelers fans are educated people! Can anyone else see the irony here?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 28, 2014 18:49:58 GMT
Don't think Modig deserved man of the match last night, don't particularly think he had an outstanding match, I would personally have given it Landry Started off shaky but after the two goals he was pretty good. Lawrence would have been mine. But Landry is a good shout
|
|
Shaggy
Forum Moderator
Am I a cynical idealist or an idealistic cynic?
Posts: 10,995
|
Post by Shaggy on Dec 28, 2014 18:58:06 GMT
Don't think Modig deserved man of the match last night, don't particularly think he had an outstanding match, I would personally have given it Landry No complaints about Modig getting MoM, but I agree - Landry would have been my choice as well (and not just because of his tying goal... he worked well all game). Lawrence got 2 goals, he does have that very valuable scoring touch... but he does seem to coast an awful lot - very frustrating. No Steelers fans are educated people! Can anyone else see the irony here? Oh yes!
|
|
|
Post by marksteeler on Dec 28, 2014 19:33:24 GMT
Hicks got it wrong simple as that. Braehead beat you earlier in the season with a 4 on 3 pp OT winner. I'm sure baldwin didn't mean to fire the puck into the crowd. Players do that sort of thing all the time. Thought panthers just about deserved the game. Legue missed one on one was the turning point I feel. Shame a minority of panthers fans ruined an enjoyable game by pouring beer on steelers fans in block one from in the excutive boxes,
|
|
|
Post by ggggranville on Dec 28, 2014 20:03:54 GMT
I recall a few years ago that Corey, in frustration hit the puck into the crowd at Braehead, hitting a young lad. I recall there was a hue and cry from fans of the Clan followed by a charm offensive by GM and Corey. If Im not mistaken I think the young lad who was hit received some Panthers memorabilia. I dont think the issue went any further!
|
|
iginla
Chick Zamick
Posts: 13,440
|
Post by iginla on Dec 28, 2014 20:06:18 GMT
Ah Mark,that explains why the Steelers block was only 75% full,some of the seats must have been too wet to sit on. What's happened to the Steelers away support,only about 300 there last night,there were about 7-800 Panthers fans in Sheffield.
As for Baldwin.....must remember to get one of our guys to shoot the puck at Steelers goalie well after a whistle next time and let's see how the Steelers players react. Something tells me they wouldn't like it very much. It's dangerous even for a player wearing padding,but to fire it into the crowd is a very poor show and he should be punished !
|
|
|
Post by dreadface on Dec 28, 2014 20:16:52 GMT
We have a bright new shiny stick to beat the Panthers with, it's called the 'inability to win face offs truncheon', and credit where it's due, I have always enjoyed winning a face off far more than winning a game of ice hockey. Steelers second goal was a prime example as to why you need to win face offs.
|
|
Shorty
Paul Adey
Still here for Private Messages
Posts: 6,636
|
Post by Shorty on Dec 28, 2014 20:26:16 GMT
Shame a minority of panthers fans ruined an enjoyable game by pouring beer on steelers fans in block one from in the excutive boxes, Wonder if it were the same people who were chucking stuff on block 202 from the boxes on Friday
|
|
|
Post by kezypanther on Dec 28, 2014 20:56:42 GMT
An image I took last night was a great idea for the cards IMO
|
|
iginla
Chick Zamick
Posts: 13,440
|
Post by iginla on Dec 28, 2014 21:23:01 GMT
It looked good,but I didn't think the black worked overly well though,it got sort of lost in the sea of faces and didn't stand out. Rather looks like one block are holding yellow cards up and the next block are just stood there with nothing.
Perhaps if we had some different colour shirts than black it might work ! (;
|
|
cb93
Jade Galbraith
Posts: 68
|
Post by cb93 on Dec 28, 2014 21:32:50 GMT
Shame a minority of panthers fans ruined an enjoyable game by pouring beer on steelers fans in block one from in the excutive boxes, That's awful... I wouldn't waste my beer on Steelers fans!
|
|
|
Post by pantherman66 on Dec 28, 2014 21:55:17 GMT
Is it because if you win the face off, you get possession of the puck?
|
|
Bolts
Pat Casey
Posts: 319
|
Post by Bolts on Dec 28, 2014 22:17:24 GMT
4 points from 2 games and the same old folk still moaning.
The effort and result couldn't be criticised so face off winning is next!
|
|
|
Post by spik on Dec 28, 2014 22:42:00 GMT
Seems a fair solution, obviously the officials do know the rules, but rarely implement them, zero tolerance springs to mind. I'm not sure why it went to 5 on 4 in OT, rather than 4 on 3, but I'm guessing that "carried over" penalties are served and played as "normal" this year? If we'd not scored, I guess we would have played 5 on 5 when the penalty expired, until the next whistle, when it would have then been then 4 on 4 as "normal" OT. Also, not sure why Sheffield would ever not get penalised if taking a minor in OT? If it was 4 on 3 in OT and another penalty was taken by Steelers, then it becomes 5 on 3, then the first penalised player returns to the ice if the first penalty is killed, making it 5 on 4, until the next whistle, when it returns to 4 on 3 for the next face off, for the remainder of the second minor, when it returns to 4 on 4. There's no chance that Sheffield would ever have "not got penalised" had they taken a minor in OT? After seeing the rules shown on Facebook by a fan your dead on the money. Regulation ending 5 on 3 starts the same in OT but for this game I understand it should have been 4-3....so ref got it wrong by the wording I saw. The penalties alter down to 4 on 4 as you say and if a second penalty had come with Steelers still in the box in OT we would have gone onto 5.
|
|
iginla
Chick Zamick
Posts: 13,440
|
Post by iginla on Dec 28, 2014 22:48:39 GMT
Your right Bolts but.....the point some people are making is correct too,face offs are crucial,because come the close margin big game finals later in the season,it will cost a team in the end when they lose a crucial face off in their own end late in a game and end up conceding from the loss of possession.
|
|
|
Post by bobness on Dec 29, 2014 9:26:39 GMT
I'm not sure why it went to 5 on 4 in OT, rather than 4 on 3, but I'm guessing that "carried over" penalties are served and played as "normal" this year? If we'd not scored, I guess we would have played 5 on 5 when the penalty expired, until the next whistle, when it would have then been then 4 on 4 as "normal" OT. Also, not sure why Sheffield would ever not get penalised if taking a minor in OT? If it was 4 on 3 in OT and another penalty was taken by Steelers, then it becomes 5 on 3, then the first penalised player returns to the ice if the first penalty is killed, making it 5 on 4, until the next whistle, when it returns to 4 on 3 for the next face off, for the remainder of the second minor, when it returns to 4 on 4. There's no chance that Sheffield would ever have "not got penalised" had they taken a minor in OT? After seeing the rules shown on Facebook by a fan your dead on the money. Regulation ending 5 on 3 starts the same in OT but for this game I understand it should have been 4-3....so ref got it wrong by the wording I saw. The penalties alter down to 4 on 4 as you say and if a second penalty had come with Steelers still in the box in OT we would have gone onto 5. Sorted then! Most of the crowd were wondering why it wasn't 4 on 3 too, judging by the noise. That is my favourite "most of the crowd don't know the rules" moment, when a side gets 2 different minors in OT and the opposition thus get 5 skaters... As to face offs being/not being important, you only have to look at a goal scored by a certain Mr Nordmark, in Newcastle, with a gnat's crotchet to go, in a game when we needed to score. Take a bow, Mr Hadden.
|
|
yeti
Robert Lachowicz
Posts: 423
|
Post by yeti on Dec 29, 2014 10:55:56 GMT
Greg Garden was the best faceoff man Panthers have had in my opinion. Also thought Parent won some good draws on Saturday.
|
|
Shaggy
Forum Moderator
Am I a cynical idealist or an idealistic cynic?
Posts: 10,995
|
Post by Shaggy on Dec 29, 2014 11:06:49 GMT
Greg Garden was the best faceoff man Panthers have had in my opinion. Also thought Parent won some good draws on Saturday. Do you mean Greg Hadden or Graham Garden? I presume you mean Hadds... in which case, I fully agree with you.
|
|
|
Post by ted logan on Dec 29, 2014 11:13:39 GMT
Greg Garden was the best faceoff man Panthers have had in my opinion. Also thought Parent won some good draws on Saturday. Do you mean Greg Hadden or Graham Garden? I presume you mean Hadds... in which case, I fully agree with you. Hadden was unreal. In the Neilson era, I'd say Tessier has been the best.
|
|