Kryten Posted April 23, 2012 Share Posted April 23, 2012 IMO he knew he was in trouble and was hoping to draw a penalty to stop play. Pretty obvious embellishment actually. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Denguin Posted April 23, 2012 Share Posted April 23, 2012 Hamhuis tried to do too much, got checked, fell, and attempted to dive to save his ass. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
La Mauviette75 Posted April 23, 2012 Share Posted April 23, 2012 hamius was definitely not hooked. he committed a text book holding the stick penalty, not that it matters at this point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EV604 Posted April 23, 2012 Share Posted April 23, 2012 B U L L S H I T Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
inder19 Posted April 23, 2012 Share Posted April 23, 2012 Not hooked. The whistle before the goal I said “If AV doesn’t call a timeout kings will score. Kings are playing to end the series NOW and a timeout will kill some of their momentum and give Canucks a chance” Of course as usual no timeout and kings score. Anyone who plays sports will know how important a well timed timeout can be. I beleive laviollete used on in each of his first round games? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AllHailSmyl Posted April 23, 2012 Share Posted April 23, 2012 Nope. Even IF he was, in playoff hockey you usually have to commit murder to get a penalty call anyways so it wouldn't have been called. Just the way it goes. Good shot, good goal, the better team moved on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WL Canuck Fan Posted April 23, 2012 Share Posted April 23, 2012 We lost the series by letting them get up on us by 3 games. If a penalty had been called on that play, it would have been for coincidental minors. LA for interference, Van for grabbing the stick. I have not been happy with the reffing this series BUT, the ref called it right on this play, Possibly coincidental minors, hence no penalty. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boudrias Posted April 23, 2012 Share Posted April 23, 2012 He was going down and grabbed the stick to slow the checker. Not a penalty. Compared to last year the reffing in this series was much better. I am not an NHL reffing fan by any stretch. The Keith hit on Sedin was what ended any hope Van had this year. That said even if they had got past LA they would have been toast. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johngould21 Posted April 23, 2012 Share Posted April 23, 2012 He was going down and grabbed the stick to slow the checker. Not a penalty. Compared to last year the reffing in this series was much better. I am not an NHL reffing fan by any stretch. The Keith hit on Sedin was what ended any hope Van had this year. That said even if they had got past LA they would have been toast. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Odjickwillkillyou Posted April 23, 2012 Share Posted April 23, 2012 No excuses for this one. Sorry. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heretic Posted April 23, 2012 Share Posted April 23, 2012 NO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! The series is over - the better team won. Canucks just didn't have it in them this year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DarthANGER Posted April 23, 2012 Share Posted April 23, 2012 He was not hooked. He thought he could handle around a few Kings players instead of chipping it off the boards. He failed miserably and cost us the game. This is the dumb crap that was happening all series and we payed for it! Idiots making idiotic plays!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Provost Posted April 23, 2012 Share Posted April 23, 2012 Sure looked like it to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ubcanuck Posted April 23, 2012 Share Posted April 23, 2012 Nope. But the replay clearly showed him clutching a Kings stick. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MANGO Posted April 23, 2012 Share Posted April 23, 2012 I honestly think he took a dive at the most important moment of the yr...he held onto the guys stick and tried to draw a penalty. Brutal Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimmy.crack.corn Posted April 23, 2012 Share Posted April 23, 2012 He got pushed off the puck, lost his balance, and then out of desperation knowing what him falling down means, grabbed onto the LA players stick to attempt to draw a penalty. I'd rather him try to do that rather than nothing at all. But he was clearly knocked off the puck and then fell. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
timberz21 Posted April 23, 2012 Share Posted April 23, 2012 No, high risk play. I haven't seen Hamhuis carry the puck all year long, why freaking now? Was barely a hook. Would have been called in Oct-Nov, but Hamhuis more or less lost his footing on his own. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
riffraff Posted April 23, 2012 Share Posted April 23, 2012 It was a bad decision on his part to try and skate it out nearly last man back. He is a small dman who lost the battle and got knocked off the puck. We lost almost every puck battle this series. Not a penalty. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Walkin'2929 Posted April 23, 2012 Share Posted April 23, 2012 No. He lost his footing when he was checked. Unfortunate really. I'm sure he feels bad about it. He's not to blame for the loss though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RUPERTKBD Posted April 23, 2012 Share Posted April 23, 2012 When the play first happened, I was thinking he was being held, but after watching the replay, it was pretty much a case of great backchecking by the Kings' player (Lewis?) I feel bad for Hammer. He was easily the Canucks' best defender in this series, but people will remember this play as the one that lost Vancouver the series, even though it was yet another terrible play by Edler on the Richardson goal that was the real culprit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.