You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!
The banners on the left side and below do not show for registered users!
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact contact us.
Vancouver Off-Topic / Current EventsThe off-topic forum for Vancouver, funnies, non-auto centered discussions, WORK SAFE. While the rules are more relaxed here, there are still rules. Please refer to sticky thread in this forum.
FRASER: SHOULD ANAHEIM HAVE GOTTEN A SEVEN-MINUTE 5-ON-3?
So the Canucks are on the wrong side of a seven-minute power play (again) and this time, it was a 5-on-3 power play for the Ducks!
In all my years of watching hockey, I have never seen a 5-on-3 power play for that length of time. I've tried my best at looking at the play and I came up with a ruling of how I would have called it, would you agree with my assessment?
Tom Sestito hits Mathieu Perreault before the whistle blows - watch closely and you can see Sestito hit Perreault before the whistle blows. Tim Jackman comes in with his stick high which is met with high sticks from a few other players. Sestito then drops the gloves and drags Jackman down. During this, Sami Vatanen comes in from the blue line and puts Jannik Hansen in a headlock. The linesman comes in and while Jackman is down on the ice, Sestito throws a couple more punches. Meanwhile, Hansen is trying to break free and drops his gloves thinking that he's with a willing combatant. But Vatanen keeps his gloves on and Hansen stops once he's separated.
For this, I would define Jackman's actions after Sestito dropped Perreault as the beginning of the incident. As such, I don't think that an instigator should have been awarded here. To get them both out of the game, I would have given each five for fighting and a ten-minute misconduct. For Hansen, I would have given him either a double minor for roughing or a five for fighting and a ten minute misconduct. However, Vatanen coming in from the blue line and putting Hansen in a headlock deserved a two minute minor for roughing. This would have left the Ducks with a power play, but not a seven-minute 5-on-3!
As always, I would love to get your opinion as it's rare to hear a referee explain their calls in any sport. Would you like to see referees respond to questions from the media in the future?
Gareth, I like your assessment better than the seven minute 5-on-3 for a couple of reasons.
1) As you correctly pointed out there was some initial response from two Duck players (Tim Jackman and Sami Vatanen) that was not recognized in the penalty assessment.
2) The second issue I have is that with 7:11 remaining in a blow-out Duck win, any subsequent infraction that a Vancouver player might receive would be treated as a "delayed penalty" if it was assessed prior to the expiration of the major penalties incurred by Tom Sestito and Jannik Hansen. This scenario provides little deterrent for Vancouver players to restrain themselves from taking penalties. Also, the more goals the Ducks might score during the extended two-man advantage would only intensify the frustration that Vancouver players were already feeling.
My objective in this situation would certainly be to remove the troublemakers from both sides to eliminate future confrontations or a potential gong-show.
I would also want to manage players' negative emotions if at all possible. As such, I would be very cognisant of not 'piling on,' or further embarrassing the Canucks in a similar way that Temmu Selanne demonstrated class by not celebrating his second power play goal of the night to make the score 8-1. Selanne seemed almost reluctant to shoot the puck on the 5-on-3 at times. The shot he ultimately scored - his second power play goal of the night - was not one of his best efforts but it still found its way past Joacim Eriksson.
Some game management - when the situation calls for it - is intelligent officiating! My penalty assessment on the play goes like this Gareth:
- 2 minutes rough (on Perreault)
- 2 minutes high sticking (on Jackman)
- 5 minutes fighting (on Jackman)
- 10 minutes misc. (continuation of a fight/resisting)
- 2 minutes roughing
- 5 minutes fighting
- 10 minutes misconduct (continuation of a fight)
- 2 minutes high stick sticking (on Sestito)
- 5 minutes fighting (on Sestito)
- 4 minutes roughing
The end result is that Vancouver would play one man short for five minutes since the minor penalties would cancel out and Tim Jackman's fighting major would cancel with either Hansen's or Sestito's. Either way, coach John Tortorella would place a man in the box prior to the expiration of the major penalty.
NYR PP% at end of last season was at the bottom 5 of the league for most the year I think they ended up being 24th in the league when all games were finished, not every player is going to have chemistry together but Mike Sullivan couldn't make it work with Nash, Gaborik, Richards, Del Zotto etc.
As of today game NYR is 6th in the league for PP% It was a brutal start to the season for them under AV, but as of late they have played great over the last 10ish games Lundqvist is playing great also along with the rest of the team.
O'Reilly would be an amazing addition if the cost was one of Tanev/Corrado/Hutton.
But I question his attitude especially after sitting out last year trying to get paid. I understand he was an RFA, but most RFA accept their qualifying deal and bide their time to being a UFA. He wasn't the same level as Duchene even though in his head he thought he was. The fact he sat out really left a sour taste. And if the Canucks end up getting him, the qualifying offer is 6.5mil next year. $$$$
That said- he's essentially a more skilled Andrew Ladd-type player. And he's only 22. Exactly what the Canucks need.
LOL at thinking our bottom defence players will get O'reilly.
ROR is the real deal. Avs dont need anymore young prospects. They'll want quality in exchange.
And with the resurgence of the avs under new management. Wounds have been healed.