2016 NHL Playoffs, Rite of Spring: "You thought God was an architect"

[Unocal]

Why does McCarthy hate Pittsburgh teams so much?

[The_Admiral]

Why do you hate everything? You first.

[Alex Houston]

I just had a good laugh, looking back at my brackets in the bracket challenge. I had San Jose losing in seven and the Pens beating the Kings.

 

As for the rest, I think two different comments chains summarize this series well.

 

 

 

Followed by this one.

 

 

 

4 hours ago, McCarthy said:

*sigh* The Penguins are the better team. Mike Sullivan figured out how to used 2 of the best 5 players in the world on the same team and Jim Rutherford fell into some good moves. Matt Murray is Ken Dryden and rescues the team from MAF. That city continues to horseshoes. 

 

Hard life for Steelers/Penguins fans. Four championships in ten years. CHAMPIYINZ.

 

 

[ElwoodCuse]

5 hours ago, Coast2CoastAM2006 said:

Barring some epic collapse by the Pens, I don't see the Sharks coming back from a 3-1 deficit. Even if the Sharks win game 5, the Pens have shown they will bounce back and follow it up with a win. But as we have seen, anything can happen. The GS Warriors came back from a 3-1 deficit against the Thunder, who manhandled the Warriors through the first 4 games. 

 

Nobody has come back from 3-1 in Stanley Cup Finals since 1942, when the Leafs came back from 3-0

[wildwing64]

On 06/06/2016 at 9:16 PM, Still MIGHTY said:

I thought we as a logo-loving people would enjoy this. 

 

 

 

I wonder if he'll end up choking on the penguin.

[Still MIGHTY]

Nah. I wouldn't consider this Sharks run a choke, for once. They battled through three rounds successfully, made their first Cup Final, and just ran up against a better team. They're not being inexplicably beaten or losing in comical fashion. They're just losing fair and square. No shame in this one for the Sharks at the end of it.

 

But I'll still laugh.

[GriffinM6]

2 hours ago, SabresRule7361 said:

Why does McCarthy hate Pittsburgh teams so much?

I think the answer to that question is in his sig. 

[Unocal]

And to think, if not for that stupid ticky-tack offsides rule that waived off a Drouin goal that would've made it 1-0 in game 6.....

 

If Pittsburgh wins the Cup, they can thank that stupid rule for saving them from trouble.

[Crabcake]

18 minutes ago, SabresRule7361 said:

And to think, if not for that stupid ticky-tack offsides rule that waived off a Drouin goal that would've made it 1-0 in game 6.....

 

If Pittsburgh wins the Cup, they can thank that stupid rule for saving them from trouble.

Yes, that rule is ticky-tack and yes that disallowed goal was a huge factor in Pittsburgh winning, but that is not the reason they will most likely win the Cup tomorrow. It is because they finally found a coach that highlighted his team's strengths and minimized their weaknesses. I'm not happy about that fact that tomorrow is essentially a coronation for Pittsburgh, but I have no doubt in my mind that they were the best team in the playoffs this year. 

[Sport]

4 hours ago, SabresRule7361 said:

Why does McCarthy hate Pittsburgh teams so much?

 

The same reasons you hate everything except my hatred is justified and rational. 

[KittSmith_95]

McCarthy is from Ohio, @SabresRule7361 .

 

Also, I have to admit I'm upset I wanted to see Joe & Marleau win a Cup. Instead, it's Crosby, Malkin & Kessel.

 

(Also: Either way a former Leaf would've won a Ring. Reimer & Polak are on the Sharks now.)

[The_Admiral]

I like Marleau, but Joe Thornton has become a darling of the worst hockey fans.

[Thomas]

10 hours ago, wildwing64 said:

 

I wonder if he'll end up choking on the penguin.

He will perhaps end up with some sort of poisoning. Being from the steel city, that penguin is probably full of iron and mercury

 

[ElwoodCuse]

15 hours ago, SabresRule7361 said:

And to think, if not for that stupid ticky-tack offsides rule that waived off a Drouin goal that would've made it 1-0 in game 6.....

 

If Pittsburgh wins the Cup, they can thank that stupid rule for saving them from trouble.

 

Then they're even for the blatantly offside Briere goal that kicked off the crapshow that was the Flyers series.

 

Boo hoo hoo. You can say there shouldn't be coaches challenges if you want but he was offside and the correct call was made. There's no "ticky tack" about it, either you are onside or off. And he was.

[Sport]

44 minutes ago, ElwoodCuse said:

 

Then they're even for the blatantly offside Briere goal that kicked off the crapshow that was the Flyers series.

 

Boo hoo hoo. You can say there shouldn't be coaches challenges if you want but he was offside and the correct call was made. There's no "ticky tack" about it, either you are onside or off. And he was.

Let's start calling icing every single time then. Either it's icing or it's not. Every time a guy shoves another guy with both hands on his stick is cross-checking. Right?

 

It's not black and white and it goes down to what is the purpose of the blue line. It's to prevent a player from entering the zone ahead of the puck. For all intents and purposes Drouin was behind the puck when it entered the zone. His entire body was behind the line at the time the puck entered the zone, except for being in the air above it, he made a significant attempt to hold up, which is the purpose of the rule, and provided Tampa no additional advantage that led to the goal so yeah incredibly ticky tack. There's plenty of room for interpretation and nuance on this rule and that was cheap way to take a good goal off the board.

 

I'd be saying the exact same thing had the Penguins not been the beneficiary of said stupid rule just like I've been saying all playoffs long. It has to be amended and I fully expect it will. 

 

[ElwoodCuse]

30 minutes ago, McCarthy said:

It's not black and white and it goes down to what is the purpose of the blue line. It's to prevent a player from entering the zone ahead of the puck. For all intents and purposes Drouin was behind the puck when it entered the zone. His entire body was behind the line at the time the puck entered the zone, except for being in the air above it, he made a significant attempt to hold up, which is the purpose of the rule, and provided Tampa no additional advantage that led to the goal so yeah incredibly ticky tack. There's plenty of room for interpretation and nuance on this rule and that was cheap way to take a good goal off the board.

 

 

There is absolutely none of what you stated in the offside rule. Body is irrelevant, it's position of the player's skates. "Significant attempt to hold up" doesn't exist. "Provided no additional advantage" doesn't exist. Your conclusion requires the offside rule to be entirely rewritten.

[Sport]

3 minutes ago, ElwoodCuse said:

 

There is absolutely none of what you stated in the offside rule. Body is irrelevant, it's position of the player's skates. "Significant attempt to hold up" doesn't exist. "Provided no additional advantage" doesn't exist. Your conclusion requires the offside rule to be entirely rewritten.

Yes I'm aware. I'm saying those should exist. Body position should be relevant because that's the whole point of the blue line, "did the player's position provide a significant advantage to the goal?" should be a huge consideration. "Did the player make a significant attempt to stay onsides" should be a huge consideration. We have nuances in so many other parts of the game. We also have a goal scoring problem and to wipe goals off the board because of, yes, ticky tack interpretations of the rule then we're doing the sport a disservice. 

 

I'm not saying it wasn't called correctly as the book currently states (thought I haven't seen a good angle that proves Drouin was conclusively offsides and think there wasn't enough evidence to overturn the call). I'm saying it's a bad rule that shouldn't be black and white. Your team gave up a goal and you're extremely lucky it didn't count. 

[ElwoodCuse]

Yes it's extremely lucky that the NHL enforced a rule as written in the playoffs, they don't tend to do that

 

Keep moving those goalposts. "Well, it SHOULDN'T be offside." "Well, *I* didn't see conclusive evidence."

[Sport]

9 minutes ago, ElwoodCuse said:

Yes it's extremely lucky that the NHL enforced a rule as written in the playoffs, they don't tend to do that

If Drouin's onsides that puck still goes in the net. He's a centimeter offsides. Maybe. That's why you're lucky. 

 

 

Quote

 

Keep moving those goalposts. "Well, it SHOULDN'T be offside." "Well, *I* didn't see conclusive evidence."

Who's moving goalposts? I haven't changed a single position. It's a poorly written rule and I have yet to see conclusive evidence that said poorly written rule was violated. 

[OnWis97]

While you are right that the Tampa off sides did not provide a competitive advantage, that's an impossible line to draw.  I don't think the officials had a choice.  Sure, they swallow their whistles for the last 12 minutes of the game (sometimes deciding games by trying too hard not to decide the game), but reviewable plays of a black-and-white rule make it hard to just say "eh, let's let common sense prevail."

 

So I'd be really curious to see how the rule could change.  If they can change it for the better and not create bad unintended consequences that would be impressive.

 

Maybe one solution could be to make it non-reviewable (since most off-sides not caught by officials are probably not advantage-creating)...but then people would still be freaking out that the goal was allowed.  Damned if they do; damned it they don't.