REVscene Automotive Forum - The Official 2014/2015 Canucks & NHL Thread

REVscene Automotive Forum (https://www.revscene.net/forums/)

- Vancouver Off-Topic / Current Events (https://www.revscene.net/forums/vancouver-off-topic-current-events_50/)

- - The Official 2014/2015 Canucks & NHL Thread (https://www.revscene.net/forums/696001-official-2014-2015-canucks-nhl-thread.html)

LOL...i can see how its annoying but at the same time does it really matter?
traffic is pretty dead on this thread once the Canucks are out
I dunno, maybe it's just me but it's not that big of a deal.
All you have to really do is ignore it. I don't mind the occassional talk on pool tbh as long as it doesn't take over the topic, some people need a reason to be invested, you can be invested in hockey and still be true hockey fan, there's no exclusive category.
I think the more people react, the more jimmies are rustled the more its gonna come on unless the mods step in (which is a waste of time imo)

Anyway, i didn't notice that Prust got fined $5k for his dumbass rant. What a fucking goof that dumbass is...i don't know what he was trying to accomplish but the Habs seem to think you enter the golf course through the penalty box.

^^

Agreed, it happens all the time in the NFL thread. If it weren't for betting and pools sports in general wouldn't have half the following they do. I don't really see an issue with talking about it and if it's not interesting you can always skip the post.

Is McLellan high...someone needs to remind him he's playing an actual hockey team today
how the fuck is Mike Smith still in net

Quote:

Originally Posted by 6o4__boi (Post 8633640)

It matters because its a selfish post. Only mud0c's gameday dinner and tegra_devil should get the most attention in this thread, for now Kappa

Speaking about game day dinner.... The gf just got back from Quebec last week and brought me back some cheese curds so I shall be making homemade poutine(fries as well) tonight while watching the games :fuckyea:

Quote:

Originally Posted by murd0c (Post 8633636)

as what's been said over and over shut the fuck up about your hockey pool and picks already.. No one gives a fuck and we like play off hockey because it's exciting and fun to watch and you don't have to be invested in a team to enjoy it... If you do that means you truly are not a fan of hockey...

I swear people should be fucken banned from this thread when they are talking about that over and over because its straight up fucken annoying...

:ban::ban::ban::ban:

Have a mod change the title of the hockey pool thread and if you want to talk about it use that and not here since we all don't fucken care...

http://www.revscene.net/forums/65940...2-13-a-52.html

:lawl:

It's really no different from someone posting "random" posts that display they are supporting a team. Maybe they just make it less obvious they're in a pool as well, or they are actual fans of the team. Maybe the pool motive is what's rustling you, because I'm supporting teams only because of money.

In regards to that, I'll admit it. I'm a Canuck fan, and that's the only team I would ever cheer for without money being involved.

As for a hockey fan. I'll give my hats to you for being the bigger hockey fan for what's it worth. I enjoy watching highlights and great hockey plays like Ovechkin's highlight reel goals, but as to watch an entire hockey game for no invested reason just for the sake of watching good hockey...

Well, I'll need to be at least cheering for a team in order to make it interesting at an emotional level. Otherwise, I'll let the highlights catch the "good hockey moments" for me. And emotional level is really what makes watching sports so good. It's probably the biggest factor for me. That's why I would prefer to watch a "boring" Canuck 1-0 win in the playoffs over an action-fest game involving 2 other teams. When I have no reason to cheer for the other 2 teams, it really doesn't matter as much, even if the game was exciting.

AzNightmare pool related post = "make me feel special" :mamoru:

Benning saying the Canucks were shook by the Calgary crowd? Jesus wtf was he thinking..

sportsnet... lolll

but heres colin campbell explaining why the goal was no goal.
NHL hockey ops boss explains ruling on controversial Calgary Flames goal/non-goa

Quote:

Colin Campbell has been in this situation before.

Not just as the man who oversees the NHL’s controversial video reviews but as a guy caught in the middle of a shockingly similar non-goal situation 11 years back.

“Same play, same end, same place as 2004,” said the NHL’s Senior Executive Vice-President of Hockey Operations, referring to Calgary Flames sniper Martin Gelinas’ non-goal against Tampa Bay Lightning goaltender Nikolai Khabibulin in Game 6 of the Stanley Cup Final.

“What’s different is we have post cameras in net and overheads in high definition we didn’t have back then.”

Alas, none of it helped make any difference on a call that ultimately went against the Flames again when Sam Bennett’s shot was kicked out by Anaheim Ducks netminder Frederik Andersen near the goal line late Tuesday.

And for those who are still seeing red because they thought they saw white between the puck and the goal line, it’s important to point out the league made the right call.

That won’t change the belief of biased fans who will see what they want to see and believe the team got jobbed once again by big bad Toronto.

But it’s a fact.

“I understand if you are passionate and you think it was in but we don't guess -- we have to have it conclusively,” Campbell told the Calgary Sun.

“We don't use ‘almost’ or ‘I assume’ or ‘I think.’ We have to use conclusivity. It all depends on the call on the ice, and we have to prove the obvious.”

Fans throwing around screen grabs of the apparent goal on social media all day Wednesday certainly thought the call should have been an obvious one: Overruling the non-call by officials who couldn’t possibly have been able to tell in real time it crossed the goal line to tie what was a 3-2 Ducks lead with 6:17 remaining.

Fact is, the puck was obscured by the crossbar from the overhead camera, the net camera was blocked out by the goalie, as was the post camera on Andersen’s left side. The right-side post camera isn’t designed to aim down enough to see the low shot.

The photo irate Flames fans are clinging to is from a broadcast camera high up in the stands, providing an angle that gives a deceiving view Campbell does well to put in perspective.

“It's like a horse race -- you can't stand ten feet ahead of the finish line and determine who won a close race -- you have to be standing along the finish line,” Campbell said.

“Also, don't forget this -- the goal line is painted one-and-a-half inches below the ice. So you can put the puck on the goal line and stand ten feet back and see white ice underneath it. The puck could also be in the air.”

That’s where most are being fooled into believing the video is conclusive.

It’s not.

None of this is to suggest the puck never crossed that plane. It just isn’t definitive, thereby preventing the war room from overturning the officials’ (non-)call.

“If the call on the ice was ‘good goal,’ then I couldn’t overrule it either,” added Campbell, who said the cameras aren’t to blame.

“We’ve been trying to achieve perfection. Maybe one day we'll have it 100% but it’s difficult. Hey, maybe the next one we use is a crossbar camera (shooting down at the goal line).”

Brilliant idea that likely would have ended a debate many can’t believe we are still having given all the technology out there that could surely avoid any such uncertainty.

Well aware of the controversy in ’04 that many believe cost Calgary the Stanley Cup, NHL Commissioner Gary Bettman had a chat with Campbell, too, regarding the goal.

“Even Gary is calling in, asking, ‘are you sure?’” said Campbell, who was in the league’s New York office when the play was being reviewed, speaking the entire time to Situation Room boss Mike Murphy.

“We show these kind of plays to managers all year and ask them if they want us to change our approach. If they want us to use the same technique as those in a bar in Calgary use then fine but if we had said ‘good goal,’ everyone in Anaheim would be upset. But I couldn’t walk down to tell Ken King, Brian Burke, Murray Edwards or one million NDP people in Calgary that it was in. It was inconclusive.”

Fortuitously for the league and the Flames, it was rendered a moot point five minutes later as Johnny Gaudreau got the league off the hook with 20 seconds left when he tied the game 3-3, setting up Calgary’s overtime winner.

“All we did last night was say, ‘Go Johnny Go,’” Campbell said with a laugh.

He was joking. Conclusively joking.

Damn! Tampa in the house!

They should put cameras on the underside of the crossbar, camera embedded below the ice surface at the goal line, and cameras on the inside of the posts.

Can't get any more conclusive than that.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mike Oxbig (Post 8633651)

It matters because its a selfish post. Only mud0c's gameday dinner and tegra_devil should get the most attention in this thread, for now Kappa

I don't really have any chirp or cheer for today unfortunately

These tight 1-1 games...

Quote:

Originally Posted by AzNightmare (Post 8633785)

These tight 1-1 games...

always too soon jr....

2-1 washington now
haha

Need floodgates to open...

MOTHERFUCK!!!!
YOU SPOKE TOO SOON DAMMIT

Talk about lightning striking in the last second of the game. :fuckthatshit:

AHAHAHAAH HOLY TAMPA

What a save by Holtby!