|
Post by ted on Oct 14, 2007 9:36:12 GMT
Helen... on rubbing salt into the Playoff wound for steelers.... What would you have preferred? A nice announcement saying how much we like to have sheffeild come to vists and hard time better luck next year?
While we are at it shall we wait on their fans hand and foot? They ar ea visiting team in our barn who... despite not winning the game we have got one over on them and they.... and I suspect many other teams would do exactly the same to us.
|
|
|
Post by crazykeeper on Oct 14, 2007 9:40:09 GMT
That wording can only be interpreted to mean the goalie sits a misconduct, I personaly had to serve a 10 minute penalty at a game a few seasons ago...
|
|
|
Post by ted on Oct 14, 2007 9:44:01 GMT
That wording can only be interpreted to mean the goalie sits a misconduct, I personaly had to serve a 10 minute penalty at a game a few seasons ago... Id agree it does seem to word it that if there is a 10 minute or a major (which I always assumed was for fighting... not just to go hand in hand with a game or match) that the goalie must sit the full 10..... however if they havent got a back up padded up then the penalised keeper stays in net till someone is padded up. In the meantime someone on the ice at the time has to sit in place of him. Luke?
|
|
|
Post by Nemesis on Oct 14, 2007 9:44:28 GMT
I don't see any problem with the announcement, you know full well Simmsy would have mentioned it had it gone the other way.
Just a point though, Steelers did not bid for and lose the playoffs, The Hallam FM Arena/SIV did.
|
|
Helen
Ross Lambert
Posts: 1,322
|
Post by Helen on Oct 14, 2007 9:48:56 GMT
Helen... on rubbing salt into the Playoff wound for steelers.... What would you have preferred? A nice announcement saying how much we like to have sheffeild come to vists and hard time better luck next year? While we are at it shall we wait on their fans hand and foot? They ar ea visiting team in our barn who... despite not winning the game we have got one over on them and they.... and I suspect many other teams would do exactly the same to us. They could quite easily have said that the playoffs would be held in Nottingham for the next three years, full stop. And as for other teams doing it to us, thats exactly my point. I wouldn't like it if the tables were turned, and I'm sure a lot of other fans would have been complaining too. Just my opinion - and the opinion of people sitting behind me too, who felt it was unneccesary.
|
|
|
Post by LooseChippings on Oct 14, 2007 9:55:55 GMT
This is the part that lead to the confusion at rec fest... This is the kind of wording that needs cleaning up. It also backs up your point about it only being a minor for crossing the centre line. this is another area that perhaps needs reiterating to the officials as it is called relatively frequently. Bryzgalov(sp) was assesed game for it 2 seasons ago after coming out to clear a puck, slipping and sliding ove the line; and I have seen it at my level more than once. And that is taken from which Rulebook?
|
|
|
Post by Nemesis on Oct 14, 2007 9:56:09 GMT
That wording can only be interpreted to mean the goalie sits a misconduct, I personaly had to serve a 10 minute penalty at a game a few seasons ago... Id agree it does seem to word it that if there is a 10 minute or a major (which I always assumed was for fighting... not just to go hand in hand with a game or match) that the goalie must sit the full 10..... however if they havent got a back up padded up then the penalised keeper stays in net till someone is padded up. In the meantime someone on the ice at the time has to sit in place of him. Luke? This is what all the confussion is eh? I do actualy agree with LC, and the IIHF rules are a little clearer, it is these local interpretations that cause the problems. Quoting rule books unfortunately makes little difference in the actual game where local interps muddy the waters, even though it should! We all see this confusion about multiple things, especialy at our level (Rec) I was once asked to go for a 2 minute minor The lino come over and cleared it up with the ref who was under the impression that I had to go as we were already killing a 5 on 3
|
|
|
Post by Nemesis on Oct 14, 2007 10:00:51 GMT
This is the part that lead to the confusion at rec fest... This is the kind of wording that needs cleaning up. It also backs up your point about it only being a minor for crossing the centre line. this is another area that perhaps needs reiterating to the officials as it is called relatively frequently. Bryzgalov(sp) was assesed game for it 2 seasons ago after coming out to clear a puck, slipping and sliding ove the line; and I have seen it at my level more than once. And that is taken from which Rulebook? It's an old one I grant you. 2003? EIHA. It's a copy I have in written form in front of me now. If it's changed (As I hope it has) then fair enough I haven't seen the latest version, but this again demonstrates the point mate; there are that many interpretations and changes it is just a nightmare. I do appreciate all you say about the IIHF rules and I know what you say is true. It's just that at the coal face this means naught - even though it should. Chaos still rules unfortunately. We often have delays at rec games while the officials argue about summat...
|
|
|
Post by LooseChippings on Oct 14, 2007 10:10:41 GMT
Not even the EIHA would be stupid enough to invent rules that are so far removed from the IIHF Rulebook.
|
|
Shorty
Paul Adey
Still here for Private Messages
Posts: 6,636
|
Post by Shorty on Oct 14, 2007 10:14:04 GMT
The 2+10 on Lehman still needs clearing up. Thomas was off to the dressing room (no penalty called on him) so who sits Lehmans 2+10. They put Cornish in, but he was not on the ice at the time the penalty was called and correctly sent back to the bench. Finnerty then sits in the box and play commences. Is Finnerty sitting the 2 or the 10 minutes? It cant be both as once the two minutes is over, someone has to go back on to the ice. Ashley Tait points this out to the ref about 90 seconds into the penalty, and then Cornish goes across and sits in the box (the player that was originally told he could not sit the penalty). The two minutes is up, Finnerty is back on the ice and assists on a goal. Thomas then replaces Cornish who was serving the ten minutes. How is that possible? ?? As for the game itself, it has all been said already. If the bookies offered odds on Panthers v Steelers, we would all make an absolute fortune. Groundhog Day? More like Grounhog year.
|
|
David
Forum Moderator
Posts: 1,308
|
Post by David on Oct 14, 2007 10:16:08 GMT
Was their first goal offside? Or was it just me who thought that!
|
|
|
Post by Nemesis on Oct 14, 2007 10:16:45 GMT
Not even the EIHA would be stupid enough to invent rules that are so far removed from the IIHF Rulebook. The implication there being....what? Would you like me to scan the pages?
|
|
|
Post by LooseChippings on Oct 14, 2007 10:18:53 GMT
The 2+10 on Lehman still needs clearing up. Thomas was off to the dressing room (no penalty called on him) so who sits Lehmans 2+10. They put Cornish in, but he was not on the ice at the time the penalty was called and correctly sent back to the bench. Finnerty then sits in the box and play commences. Is Finnerty sitting the 2 or the 10 minutes? It cant be both as once the two minutes is over, someone has to go back on to the ice. Ashley Tait points this out to the ref about 90 seconds into the penalty, and then Cornish goes across and sits in the box (the player that was originally told he could not sit the penalty). The two minutes is up, Finnerty is back on the ice and assists on a goal. Thomas then replaces Cornish who was serving the ten minutes. How is that possible? ?? As for the game itself, it has all been said already. If the bookies offered odds on Panthers v Steelers, we would all make an absolute fortune. Groundhog Day? More like Grounhog year. The coach through the Captain nominated Thomas to sit the 10, but because Thomas went for medical treatment Cornish sat part of the penalty until Thomas was 'fit to sit'. All above board.
|
|
|
Post by LooseChippings on Oct 14, 2007 10:20:48 GMT
Not even the EIHA would be stupid enough to invent rules that are so far removed from the IIHF Rulebook. The implication there being....what? Would you like me to scan the pages? The EPL, ENL & Juniors don't use those Rules so where have they come from?
|
|
|
Post by Nemesis on Oct 14, 2007 10:38:45 GMT
Like I said, it is a book I have in hard copy from a few years ago. I pretty sure they are the EIHA ones from that year but I don't know for sure as there is no cover. The book was given to me like that. I appreciate that these will not be the rules currently in force. I just wanted to show you that at some point this rule did exist, and is still called; as demostrated by CrazyKeepers personal experience.
Again, I do not for one minute dispute the facts you quote mate, I (And the others on here and THF) are just pointing out that as much as it should be black and white, ie, by the IIHF rules, it is not, far from it. Confusion reigns because there are so many re-writes and interpretations floating about. as I am sure most rec players will testify, there are some truly baffling calls handed out at games.
|
|
|
Post by Carnell on Oct 14, 2007 11:02:37 GMT
Thought that the team went missing in the third a little.
Nice goal from Macca tonight, dont think that much could have been done about the GWG, from where i was, it seemed to take a deflection on the way in.
There was a nice bit of link up play in the 3rd(??) with Macca, Molin and then Wally which i thought deserved a goal, but Jody had a cracker of a game. I thought that both Goalies turned up tonight and had good games. Bergin had a average debut, looks like he was a little slow, but im sure that come next week, he will be up to full speed and that he will connect with PC and Matty/Richardson.
The most entertaining part was when Ryan and Cornish was exchanging insults. But suprised that they didnt drop the gloves, from what i could see, Ryan must have been told to keep his gloves on.
|
|
|
Post by NickThePanther44 on Oct 14, 2007 11:08:56 GMT
we were very poor last night, not in the playing sense as such but the attitude sense, where was the intensity, where was the sweat blood and tears hockey that would have won us that game by a country mile, where was the effort, well it was with number 77, mom for me. he hit hard, was glove punching checking and niggling at Finnerty all night (coincidence that Finnerty didnt get a sniff all night, i think not) he was the only guy putting his body on the line, and he showed Mark Thomas he shouldn't of dared lay a check on him like that, thats what i want from every player on that sodding ice wearing Gold and Black!!!
Mac didn't have a bad game but as captain should of got his lads fired up in the dressing room, decent goal but quite frankly that line should be murdering every team in the league and they couldn't break Jody down, not good enough
Jody, great game, Sheffield fans should be proud of there netty for last nights performance, some great saves and was quite simply the difference between Shef grabbing a win and getting hammered by four or five goals. BUT, there is a simple way around him and its so so simple, i was talking with my uncle about it last night and dp mentions it earlier in the thread, get him wound up Craighead had it off to an absolute tee, get in front of him and and give him the odd slash, and when you do score get in his face and scream!! that wrecked Jody for the rest of the game and he didn't do too great against Craighead in any other game that season. why does know one do that??? in fact why does know one (except Corey) do that out the whole team
were playing like Blazers team from a few seasons ago, Shmyr Bergin Pele were none existent when it came to intimidation last night and that quite frankly could of made the difference, Shef out hit us by a country mile, won all the individual battles (except Corey keeping Finnerty well at bay) and generally wanted it more. thats not good enough!! they've wanted it more in every game for the last god knows how many seasons EXCEPT last seasons quarter finals and would you believe it, we won.
Shef knew that Shmyr and in fact the whole side weren't going to be a physical threat the second Shmyr stood there whilst Cornish was doing a chicken dance, in our own bloody barn!! Shmyr lost it and Ellis should of sent him out on that next shift to throw the body around (anyone want to say but he'll of got a penalty, so flipping what, he would of got the team pumping) the next shift Cornish was out Ellis should of told Shmyr to go out and not come back until there was blood on that ice, remember how much Stefishen got his team pumped by fighting Shmyr at the NIC, thats all it took, im guessing Ellis didnt let Shmyr fight because there was know one to replace him on the third line, great so lets keep him on the ice so he can be on a line that wouldnt produce anything if it iced all year.
Bergin, even if he played twice aswell in the Swiss league as last night i can still see why they gassed him, slow, none phsyical and generally crap, got a good shot off at Jody but that hardly makes a game. why the hell didnt he go out pushing and shoving, announce to the league and our biggest rivals that hes back and means business.
as much as Rasto's mistake cost us the lead and it was a poor mistake i still cant fully blame him, the offense weve got should have given him about ten times more breathing space on the score board, he had one mistake, every forward made ten times that.
Stancock didnt get his gamely stupid stick penalty, congratulations
il stop now but im pretty certain il be back later as il have forgotten something
|
|
|
Post by Heanor Lair on Oct 14, 2007 11:24:55 GMT
As the cageforums new 'part time supporter , and being at work to earn money (how dare I) then dont know about the game. However a couple of the shuff lads said the Panthers had chances to win the game but didnt take them. HL
|
|
|
Post by NickThePanther44 on Oct 14, 2007 11:28:36 GMT
how dare you even post on this forum!!
|
|
Lyn
Lorne Smith
Posts: 717
|
Post by Lyn on Oct 14, 2007 11:31:16 GMT
The only mistake we made last night was not finishing them off in the first period. We could and should have been up by at least four and then sat back and defended. We certainly needed as many back defending as possible because our defence is pretty non existant most of the time.
Absolutely applaud Shmyr's decision to ignore Cornish's invite, the game was to tight to fall for it. Cornish confirmed as a total waste of space, apart from the chicken dance his foot work is apalling, maybe figure skating is his way forward.
Hope Bergin just needs to settle, very unimpressive last night.
As I said last night, we have zero chance of winning the league but sheffield have about the same odds.
|
|
Shorty
Paul Adey
Still here for Private Messages
Posts: 6,636
|
Post by Shorty on Oct 14, 2007 11:31:43 GMT
The 2+10 on Lehman still needs clearing up. Thomas was off to the dressing room (no penalty called on him) so who sits Lehmans 2+10. They put Cornish in, but he was not on the ice at the time the penalty was called and correctly sent back to the bench. Finnerty then sits in the box and play commences. Is Finnerty sitting the 2 or the 10 minutes? It cant be both as once the two minutes is over, someone has to go back on to the ice. Ashley Tait points this out to the ref about 90 seconds into the penalty, and then Cornish goes across and sits in the box (the player that was originally told he could not sit the penalty). The two minutes is up, Finnerty is back on the ice and assists on a goal. Thomas then replaces Cornish who was serving the ten minutes. How is that possible? ?? As for the game itself, it has all been said already. If the bookies offered odds on Panthers v Steelers, we would all make an absolute fortune. Groundhog Day? More like Grounhog year. The coach through the Captain nominated Thomas to sit the 10, but because Thomas went for medical treatment Cornish sat part of the penalty until Thomas was 'fit to sit'. All above board. That still does not explain how they only had one player in the box instead of two for nearly the whole of the two minute penalty.
|
|
|
Post by Rob #12 on Oct 14, 2007 11:32:13 GMT
As the cageforums new 'part time supporter , and being at work to earn money (how dare I) then dont know about the game. However a couple of the shuff lads said the Panthers had chances to win the game but didnt take them. HL That is a self given title, nobody ever called you that but yourself.
|
|
|
Post by NickThePanther44 on Oct 14, 2007 11:33:59 GMT
i dont understand why people are happy Shmyr refused the fight, obviously he was following orders but it considerably added to the momentum swinging Sheffields way, yeah great decision
|
|
Lyn
Lorne Smith
Posts: 717
|
Post by Lyn on Oct 14, 2007 11:34:17 GMT
The coach through the Captain nominated Thomas to sit the 10, but because Thomas went for medical treatment Cornish sat part of the penalty until Thomas was 'fit to sit'. All above board. That still does not explain how they only had one player in the box instead of two for nearly the whole of the two minute penalty. Was it not becuse Cornish had a call of nature and returned to the dressing room, he seemed to come from the back of the bench to the box at break in play
|
|
|
Post by Big Dave Steeler on Oct 14, 2007 11:36:49 GMT
Absolutely applaud Shmyr's decision to ignore Cornish's invite, the game was to tight to fall for it. Cornish confirmed as a total waste of space, apart from the chicken dance his foot work is apalling, maybe figure skating is his way forward. Although yes he did not dance, I would hardly call him storming to the Bench after Cornish was on the bench 'ignored' would you!!!
|
|