Marlies Talk
- Thread starter armche123
- Start date
crazyperfectdevil
New member
they got farther then i've ever seen the leafs get..i guess that counts for something
maplesyrup
New member
Just getting home... Missed it but when I see the goal, I have a feeling I'm going to feel a little sick.
crazyperfectdevil
New member
Sarge said:
you're definitely in for a treat
bustaheims
Active member
When a team is getting goals like that, you have to think they're just destined to win.
GhostofPotvin29
New member
http://video.mapleleafs.nhl.com/videocenter/console?catid=802&id=180954&cmpid=embed-share-video
link to OT highlights
Goal is obviously at the end - starting around 37 second mark.
It didn't seem to curl in the way the announcer seemed to originally describe it (after the end of the video below) so from that video, maybe it wasn't a 1,000,000:1 shot but it remains terribly unlucky.
EDIT:
Different angle video
Goal is obviously at the end - starting around 37 second mark.
It didn't seem to curl in the way the announcer seemed to originally describe it (after the end of the video below) so from that video, maybe it wasn't a 1,000,000:1 shot but it remains terribly unlucky.
EDIT:
Different angle video
crazyperfectdevil
New member
cw said:
he did make some awesome saves...
we all knew the team was too banged up to win this ..like realistically anyway..just sucks to see it play out like that anyway
Mirtle, Globe & Mail:
Bad bounce for Marlies gives Admirals a stranglehold in Calder Cup final
Despite Scrivens?s rise, however, the Leafs brass appear committed to bringing in a veteran backstop for next season, which likely leaves the personable 25-year-old attempting to unseat friend (and former Marlie) James Reimer at training camp in the fall.
While Reimer has an advantage given his NHL experience and two more years of a $1.8-million-a-season contract, Scrivens?s track record in the AHL is both longer (72 games to 44 in the regular season alone) and better (.925 save percentage to .920).
Contract or not, the Cornell grad may ultimately prove to be the better netminder, even if his 12-game audition in the NHL this season was somewhat uneven.
How this one memorable bounce goes down on his resume remains to be seen. But beyond better karma, what Scrivens has left to learn at the AHL level is up for debate.
I think that last sentence is probably pretty valid.
It was a very difficult loss to take. But a silver lining is that the Leafs have a young goalie with a good head on his shoulders who has progressed very well to the highest level of the AHL.
Bad bounce for Marlies gives Admirals a stranglehold in Calder Cup final
Despite Scrivens?s rise, however, the Leafs brass appear committed to bringing in a veteran backstop for next season, which likely leaves the personable 25-year-old attempting to unseat friend (and former Marlie) James Reimer at training camp in the fall.
While Reimer has an advantage given his NHL experience and two more years of a $1.8-million-a-season contract, Scrivens?s track record in the AHL is both longer (72 games to 44 in the regular season alone) and better (.925 save percentage to .920).
Contract or not, the Cornell grad may ultimately prove to be the better netminder, even if his 12-game audition in the NHL this season was somewhat uneven.
How this one memorable bounce goes down on his resume remains to be seen. But beyond better karma, what Scrivens has left to learn at the AHL level is up for debate.
I think that last sentence is probably pretty valid.
It was a very difficult loss to take. But a silver lining is that the Leafs have a young goalie with a good head on his shoulders who has progressed very well to the highest level of the AHL.
GhostofPotvin29
New member
Bunch of talk on Twitter that it was a missed call because of the guy being offside too. I haven't watched the replay yet though.
EDIT: I do remember one thing from watching it the first time - pretty sure the Norfolk guy FIST PUMPED a crazy deflection goal.
EDIT: I do remember one thing from watching it the first time - pretty sure the Norfolk guy FIST PUMPED a crazy deflection goal.
Potvin29 said:
http://www.nhl.com/ice/page.htm?id=26497
83.4 Disallowed Goal ? If the puck is shot on goal during a delayed off-side, the play shall be allowed to continue under the normal clearing-the-zone rules. Should the puck, as a result of this shot, enter the defending team?s goal during a delayed off-side, either directly or off the goalkeeper, a player or an official on the ice, the goal shall be disallowed as the original shot was off-side. The face-off will be conducted at the face-off spot in the zone closest to the point of origin of the shot or at the nearest face-off spot in the neutral zone adjacent to the attacking zone of the offending team.
The only way an attacking team can score a goal on a delayed off-side situation is if the defending team shoots or puts the puck into their own net without action or contact by the offending team.
Other than in situations involving a delayed off-side and the puck being shot on goal, no goal can be disallowed after the fact for an off-side violation, except for the human factor involved in blowing the whistle.
The opposing player was in the zone when the puck entered the zone
Different angle video
A question might be: did the delayed offside expire because he cleared the zone prior to the puck going into the net? I'm not absolutely sure if it can expire without the Marlies touching the puck, etc.
An issue is that I didn't see the refs raise their arm to signal an offside (I couldn't see all of the refs but the ones I did see didn't seem to raise their arm). I'm not absolutely settled on this but my initial reaction is that it looks like they may have missed the call - according to those rules. the goal arguably should not have been allowed ... which would kind of make it that much harder to take. But then even coach Eakins didn't seem to raise the issue after the game (Edit: apparently the Marlies did complain about this last night).
EDIT: I also saw some twitter claims that the puck hit the refs skate. I haven't been able to conclude that in the replays I've seen. If it did, that makes it that much more of a fluke.
GhostofPotvin29
New member
Just watched the video I posted above and one linesman puts his arms out to waive it off, but I can't tell if it is for the offside or the icing - but I assume it is for any icing because he was at the far blueline, not the Marlies blueline.
EDIT: And this makes me think it doesn't matter if he tagged up: "the goal shall be disallowed as the original shot was off-side." That, to me, focuses on what the situation was when the shot was taken, and if it was off-side when it was taken then it doesn't count.
EDIT: And this makes me think it doesn't matter if he tagged up: "the goal shall be disallowed as the original shot was off-side." That, to me, focuses on what the situation was when the shot was taken, and if it was off-side when it was taken then it doesn't count.
Potvin29 said:
I'm positive that was for the icing because if you look at the video in my most recent post, at the 20 second mark, the ref is waving off while the Admiral player is still well inside in the offensive zone. I had looked originally to see if the shooter had reached center ice when he took the shot and I think he had but it was close enough, a ref would be looking at it - and therefore, the ref waved off icing when he saw the player shot it legitimately from center ice (though I don't think the puck ever crossed the red line - nor did a Marlie ever touch it so icing never really enters into it beyond the ref making a ruling in advance).