Jump to content
IGNORED

NHL 2020-21 (or just 2021)


Recommended Posts

  • Moderator
2 hours ago, mcanadiens said:

If there wasn't still grey area then, by your logic, the NHL would have dealt out several of your 10-game suspensions. I know. The dinosaurs are still in charge.

No, that’s not how the rules are per the CBA. Supplemental discipline is at the discretion of the commissioner’s office. That’s why the rulings are not consistent, because there’s no defined line to start from.

2 hours ago, mcanadiens said:

Don't fret. The trend is obvious.

Player protection is a priority and eventually the NHL will be a non-contact version of the sport. I'm sure you and your enlightened friends will enjoy the game very much.

Holy hell, you think the only solution is to make the sport non-contact? You’re over here talking about grey areas yet you yourself can’t seem to make an argument that isn’t black and white.

Hitting is part of the game. Hitting people in the head, or from behind into the boards, or at full speed from 90’ away should not be. They’re dangerous plays and that’s why they’re already against the rules. The problem is that penalties within the game are not enough of a deterrent to stop people from doing these things.

Hell, I still cringe every time I hear an announcer complain about a weak call because someone’s stick made contact with an opposing player’s glove. You know why they cracked down on slashing? Because somebody had the the tip of their finger cut off. Was it a freak accident? Sure. Is it preventable? Definitely. That’s the point.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

  • Replies 175
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Nikolaj Ehlers (#27 in blue) is properly getting a lot of credit for holding the scrum back from the injured Evans.  

Man, Tom Wilson just can't help himself. He's not just a goon, but he undermines his actual ability when he pulls stupid shit like this. He should be out for awhile. But it's the NHL, and th

I’m having a hard time seeing this. First, you said someone is really going to get hurt one of these days, even though the kid is out with a concussion. Then, you said you were thinking of something m

  • Administrator
3 hours ago, mcanadiens said:

If there wasn't still grey area then, by your logic, the NHL would have dealt out several of your 10-game suspensions. I know. The dinosaurs are still in charge.

Don't fret. The trend is obvious.

Player protection is a priority and eventually the NHL will be a non-contact version of the sport. I'm sure you and your enlightened friends will enjoy the game very much.

Annoyed GIF by 20th Century Fox Home Entertainment

Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Scheifele has a pretty good record with 237 penalty minutes in 575 career regular-season games, pretty good evidence that he didn't intend anything malicious. Another reason he only got four games.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

  • Administrator
24 minutes ago, Billy Z said:

pretty good evidence that he didn't intend anything malicious

No it’s not.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

7 minutes ago, iacas said:

No it’s not.

He also testified himself that it wasn't intentional.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

  • Administrator
3 minutes ago, Billy Z said:

He also testified himself that it wasn't intentional.

Ooooooooooooh.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

  • Moderator
43 minutes ago, Billy Z said:

Scheifele has a pretty good record with 237 penalty minutes in 575 career regular-season games, pretty good evidence that he didn't intend anything malicious. Another reason he only got four games.

I think a player’s history should only be relevant in that subsequent disciplinary action would be more severe. First offense should be x amount of games, second offense y amount, and so forth. A player shouldn’t be given leniency for a dirty play just because he’s not a dirty player. A dirty play is a dirty play.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

12 hours ago, billchao said:

Holy hell, you think the only solution is to make the sport non-contact? You’re over here talking about grey areas yet you yourself can’t seem to make an argument that isn’t black and white.

My point was that there is a lot of gray area. The other guy's argument was that it was black and white. 

My use of non-contact was merely to illustrate the one way you could make it less subjective. 

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Question: Why should a player be allowed to check another player when he doesn't have the puck? 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

20 minutes ago, Billy Z said:

Question: Why should a player be allowed to check another player when he doesn't have the puck? 

That would generally be ruled interference. Normally, a two-minute penalty.

It is one of those calls that are missed on a not infrequent basis.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

9 hours ago, mcanadiens said:

That would generally be ruled interference. Normally, a two-minute penalty.

It is one of those calls that are missed on a not infrequent basis.

That puts it a level beneath crosschecking, which appears to be the NHL's version of traveling.

Link to post
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, measureoffsetinnm said:

That puts it a level beneath crosschecking, which appears to be the NHL's version of traveling.

Cross-checking can often be a two-minute penalty as well. It depends on the severity which is up to referee discretion.

Vicious shots may draw a five-minute penalty, but you'll also see a lot of small cross-checks go unpenalized from game to game.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

1 hour ago, mcanadiens said:

Cross-checking can often be a two-minute penalty as well. It depends on the severity which is up to referee discretion.

Vicious shots may draw a five-minute penalty, but you'll also see a lot of small cross-checks go unpenalized from game to game.

 

imo, a cross check should 'never' be allowed, no matter what situation. 

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

2 hours ago, Billy Z said:

imo, a cross check should 'never' be allowed, no matter what situation. 

The relative strictness that the league's officials call penalties ebbs and flows over time. 

I remember directly after the 04-05 lockout that refs were whistling all manner of obstruction penalties. Half the game was on the power play for one team or the other. Hooking penalties were very popular.

Practically speaking, you could call a boatload of penalties in most games, so they sort of pick and choose the more significant ones. If it erases a clear-cut scoring chance, it is much more likely to get a whistle. It's kind of like holding penalties in American football. Call too many penalties and the game would get tough to watch. Crackdowns, like the one I mentioned, can result in a cleaner game. It's up the NHL each year to set its referee's priorities.

All that said, the current standards are hardly the worst we've seen. The game in the 90s looked like a dance contest by comparison. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

(edited)

Pick tonight's scores:

Tampa @ Carolina

(TB leads series 3-1)

 

Vegas @ Colorado

(series tied 2-2) 

Edited by Billy Z
Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

9 hours ago, mcanadiens said:

Cross-checking can often be a two-minute penalty as well. It depends on the severity which is up to referee discretion.

Vicious shots may draw a five-minute penalty, but you'll also see a lot of small cross-checks go unpenalized from game to game.

 

Yeah that is what I meant. They never call it until it is extremely egregious.

Link to post
Share on other sites

On 6/8/2021 at 3:37 PM, Billy Z said:

Vegas @ Colorado

These two teams are stupid fast.

My club is going to have to stay in front of them and take advantage of their mistakes to win this one.

Big step up from the Leafs and Jets. That's for sure.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



  • Want to join this community?

    We'd love to have you!

    Sign Up
  • Support TST Affiliates

    TourStriker PlaneMate
    Golfer's Journal
    Whoop
    SuperSpeed
    FlightScope Mevo
    Use the code "iacas" for 10% off Mevo and the code "iacasjun21" for 10% off SuperSpeed.
  • Posts

    • Or, he understands how it transfers, and he was only around his wife for two months. He didn't need to get tested… because in getting tested, maybe he would have gone out more than he did in isolating at home, perhaps? You are making a LOT of assumptions, as you often do, @Shorty. Cool it.
    • The Club at Lac La Belle - 6.5 I wasn't a big fan of this course. It was beautiful and well-maintained, but I found parts of it to be a little contrived. It's definitely a target golf course and for someone like me who is wild off the tee, it took all the fun of strategizing out of it because the risks were just too high. I did like that there was variety in the course layout with a good mix of short/long, right/left, uphill/downhill holes. I'm not sure I'd make a trip out to this one again if I'm ever back in the area for golf, but it's less than 10 minutes away from a delicious French bakery with the best croissants I have ever had, so that bumps up the score a little  I'd go back just for the croissants. The Sandbox - 7.0 This little 17 hole par 3 course was just fun. It gave you different looks and a variety of options for play. I really liked it and tried a bunch of different things I normally wouldn't have on a regular course. A 7.0 is probably the most I'd give to a par 3 course, though. Lawsonia Links - 7.5 I really enjoyed this course. Overall I found the layout to be good. There were plenty of places to miss, but you still needed to hit good golf shots to play well. I liked the way the mounds and bunkers were designed to play with the shape of the holes visually. There were really only a couple of holes I didn't like - 13 in particular, even though I made par both times using completely different strategies. It's just bordering on too many blind shots for me, though. I'd definitely play this course again if I have the chance. Mammoth Dunes - 8.5 This course was spectacular to look at - absolutely visually stunning. The pictures don't do it justice because they fail to capture the scale of everything. The place is massive. I'll echo what the others have wrote above: it's a journey. You feel like you're not going out to play a round of golf, but rather that you're going on an adventure while hitting a golf ball on the way. I understand now how some other reviews I've read or seen describe a feeling of getting lost, or losing your bearings for a bit. I wasn't thinking about routing. I had no idea where the clubhouse was. I didn't really care about any of it because I was out in this beautiful landscape. The golf itself for me was just there. I would be perfectly happy spending an afternoon just walking the course without playing it. And that's a bit of a detriment, because at the end of the day, it is a golf course. As a golf course, I found it didn't really matter much how you played it as long as you hit decent shots. There was certainly an ideal way to play the course well, and I hit some awful shots and paid the price for them, but plenty of just okay shots I got away with because of the layout. In the end that's fine. I don't need every course I play to be a grueling test of my skills.  I'd make a return trip and play this course again. Sand Valley - 9.0 This one is a golf course first and a spectacular view second. Where Mammoth Dunes focuses on the adventure, Sand Valley focuses on the golf. It's still visually stunning, but just not quite on the grand scale that Mammoth Dunes is. And Sand Valley does not let you forget for even one second that you're out there to do one thing: to play golf. I don't remember having a single shot out there that didn't require my undivided attention. The course absolutely punished you for missing your spots. But the flip side of that coin is that it was extremely rewarding to hit good shots there. An example is #8 mentioned above - I don't think I have ever felt so pleased to hit a GW to 35' before in my life, and I might never again. The course is a challenge in the best way. It makes you want to rise up to face it. I want to go back and battle it again. I shot my best score of the week with an 87 at Lawsonia, but it's the 94 the second time playing Sand Valley that I'm most proud of. Like Mammoth Dunes above, I'd make a return trip specifically to play this course again. Bonus Stuff The facilities at Sand Valley Golf Resort were top notch. The prices at the pro shop were fair. The food and drinks were also reasonably priced and delicious. The food truck at The Sandbox had the best food in the whole complex, IMO. Lac La Belle I felt was fancy but overpriced. I bought a polo at the pro shop at Sand Valley, but a similar shirt at Lac La Belle was like 50% more expensive. The golf carts had beautiful leather seats, but I absolutely hate geo-mapping on the GPS systems. I don't know how many times it slowed me down to tell me not to drive in the fescue even though I was driving parallel to it 20 yards away. Lawsonia had an older clubhouse and it certainly had a quaint feeling to it. That's not a bad thing. I did not look to see the prices they were charging for their merchandise.
    • Every YouTube video should start with a 10- to 45-minute diagnosis to make sure the video you're about to watch applies to you. There are a LOT of reasons why someone hits a slice. YouTube videos do not start with a 45-minute "disclaimer" because nobody would get through it. They just want to stop slicing, but if the video shows a fix for something that the student doesn't do, the video is less than worthless — it may actually cause more damage. Don't watch YouTube videos unless they're just working on some fundamental things, or you're very confident that what they're going to show you actually applies to you.
    • Day 274: worked on my priority pieces with a revised feel rehearsal. Results were an improvement. Trying to feel the left leg straighten and push the left hip back from A5 through impact. 
    • Played again today, a course I played a couple of times before and broke 90 easily. Shot 86 with 2x ob and one water hazard. The work that I put in the last year really shows and I feel that on the right course on the right day I could break 80 even this year. It probably won’t happen but that’s the goal for next season.    I see that I must work on 100 meters and in. So on one of the hardest holes which is a 440 yard par 4 I drove the ball over 310 and then had a pitching wedge in. It was a bit of an awkward stance but I was just left of the green. Almost chipped in but then messed up the comeback putt and instead of an easy par I made a bogey.    Maybe I’m being too hard on myself looking at the tour averages but I feel like that’s one area of the game I need to clean up - no 3 putts and more up and downs. And I really need to put more work / decide on how I want to pitch and then really let that sink in and finally get the distances for all 4 wedges for 1/2, 3/4 and full swings printed out and stick them on the clubs. 
  • Today's Birthdays

    1. Armando Araujo
      Armando Araujo
      (46 years old)
    2. chris3putt
      chris3putt
      (54 years old)
    3. CrazyHorsePete
      CrazyHorsePete
      (34 years old)
    4. DHak20
      DHak20
      (44 years old)

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Welcome to TST! Signing up is free, and you'll see fewer ads and can talk with fellow golf enthusiasts! By using TST, you agree to our Terms of Use, our Privacy Policy, and our Guidelines.

The popup will be closed in 10 seconds...