Official 2021/22 NHL Thread

[ExtraSlow]

I get the argument. I disagree with the interpretation there, but don't mind soilers getting screwed by a call.

[ThePenIsMightier]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I get the argument. I disagree with the interpretation there, but don't mind soilers getting screwed by a call.

LoL "soilers"... That's funny!
I don't know why I've never heard anyone say that.

[ExtraSlow]

I'm beyonds wittiest former engineer.

[rage2]

NHL rules for 2021 2022 season. Circled relevant sections pertaining to that play.

[ExtraSlow]

The question is if that is a "loose puck" or if it was under control all the time.

[rage2]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Consider the player "dumping" it into the zone with Nich offside and then Nich tags up before any attacking players touch the puck.
That's essentially what they're saying might have happened and that would be totally fair.
I severely doubt it and I see no angles to prove it. But if there are some, I'm all ears.

That’s a good way of explaining it. There is an angle showing it on TNT. Makar doesn’t touch the puck until delayed offside was cleared. Was shown on TNT during review even though they thought it was offside because they missed that.

[JRSC00LUDE]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

That’s a good way of explaining it. There is an angle showing it on TNT. Makar doesn’t touch the puck until delayed offside was cleared. Was shown on TNT during review even though they thought it was offside because they missed that.

Except he touches it on both sides of the line, he's just stick handling it, it's fully under his control.

[rage2]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

The question is if that is a "loose puck" or if it was under control all the time.

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Except he touches it on both sides of the line, he's just stick handling it, it's fully under his control.

What does control have to do with it? That’s not in the rules for delayed offside. The only part where control comes into play on offside rules is when you’re skating backwards into the zone before the puck in which case you need to have control of the puck.

[ThePenIsMightier]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

That’s a good way of explaining it. There is an angle showing it on TNT. Makar doesn’t touch the puck until delayed offside was cleared. Was shown on TNT during review even though they thought it was offside because they missed that.

Did the linesman raise his arm for the offside and then drop it?

[ExtraSlow]

I'm glad we now all agree what the argument is about.

- - - Updated - - -

Yep no controversy at all.

[mr2mike]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Did the linesman raise his arm for the offside and then drop it?

We still talking about Will Smith? C'mon!

[JRSC00LUDE]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

What does control have to do with it? That’s not in the rules for delayed offside. The only part where control comes into play on offside rules is when you’re skating backwards into the zone before the puck in which case you need to have control of the puck.

The way I'm reading the third thing you circled says that it does. Not only was he attempting to get a loose puck, he had full control of it. Am I misinterpreting that?

[rage2]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

The way I'm reading the third thing you circled says that it does. Not only was he attempting to get a loose puck, he had full control of it. Am I misinterpreting that?

You are. He purposely didn’t go after the puck until it was onside. TNT angle that I saw:



The relevant part was he didn’t touch the puck or attempted to go for the puck and just let it glide until onside.

Another interpretation, he can’t attempt to gain possession of a loose puck if it wasn’t a loose puck to begin with.

[ExtraSlow]

This game is fun!

[BerserkerCatSplat]

Yeah that one has been called that way a few times in recent memory. Possession doesn't matter on zone entry, it's when the puck is touched.

[ThePenIsMightier]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

You are. He purposely didn’t go after the puck until it was onside. TNT angle that I saw:



The relevant part was he didn’t touch the puck or attempted to go for the puck and just let it glide until onside.

Another interpretation, he can’t attempt to gain possession of a loose puck if it wasn’t a loose puck to begin with.

That would fit the definition for possession and control in every circumstance on earth, so I think it's an unfair interpretation to treat it like it matters that he didn't touch it until Nich cleared.
Had he flipped out into the air... I could buy that. But he's got solid possession and control the whole time.


How about I argue that he was actively pursuing a puck that he knows is offside and they charge Colorado with an intentional offside instantly and send face-off deep into their zone?
That's total bullshit, but it's less bullshit than this.

[mr2mike]

HNIC announcers just annoy me.
Where's Bieksa to big dick energy Friedman?

[pheoxs]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

That would fit the definition for possession and control in every circumstance on earth, so I think it's an unfair interpretation to treat it like it matters that he didn't touch it until Nich cleared.
Had he flipped out into the air... I could buy that. But he's got solid possession and control the whole time.


How about I argue that he was actively pursuing a puck that he knows is offside and they charge Colorado with an intentional offside instantly and send face-off deep into their zone?
That's total bullshit, but it's less bullshit than this.

That’s my issue, I understand the rule and agree if it’s not in possession then it’s not offside. But in this case it stays within a foot of his stick the entire time. Are we going to argue every time you go from a back hand to forehand that you lose possession briefly?

He clearly deflected the puck smoothly into the direction he was going and continuing with the puck in said momentum. How that isn’t possession I don’t know.

[ThePenIsMightier]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

That’s my issue, I understand the rule and agree if it’s not in possession then it’s not offside. But in this case it stays within a foot of his stick the entire time. Are we going to argue every time you go from a back hand to forehand that you lose possession briefly?

He clearly deflected the puck smoothly into the direction he was going and continuing with the puck in said momentum. How that isn’t possession I don’t know.

Now that I've seen an angle where the linesman didn't throw his arm up, yell and then drop it, you can see it only added to the confusion. That threw the players off and influenced the play.
You don't wait to waive an offside. That's an incorrect procedure and a blown call that influenced the play.

The solution should be to add 2 more linesman in Orange shirts and an extra tranny ref. Then also double the video replays.
This is why Buster should be arguing NHL sucks. Two refs have done nothing but clog the ice, for a twenty year experiment.

[pheoxs]

Some of you might hate on the Oilers but gotta admit their shit defence makes for some damn entertaining games.

https://twitter.com/snstats/status/1...tVypDQ95vLyWeg

no idea how to embed a tweet