Jump to content
The Official Site of the Vancouver Canucks
Canucks Community

[GDT] Nucks @ Bruins - Feb 04 2020 - 4pm Pacific - SNET

Rate this topic


xereau

Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, stawns said:

it's a tag up ON...........once Shorty said that ot made perfect sense.  I didn't think about it from that perspective until I heard him say it.  It was split second, but no different than a dump in and tag up

no - a dump and tag involves actually dumping the puck - ie not possessing it - this on the other hand was an obvious case of possession - McAvoy carries the puck in, with possession, before the 'tag up' = the player is trapped offside - the play is dead.

 

It's an obvious blown call - twice - and the attempt to walk it back as if McAvoy did not possess the puck and move it to himself - over the blueline - with a player trapped offside - is surreal.

  • Cheers 2
  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, stawns said:

nope, that gets blown down........Mcavoy wasn't in the zone yet, just the puck, as another poster correctly pointed out.  Had McAvoy's skates been completely inside the zone, it would have been offside and both players would have had to tag up again

If the puck is dumped into the corner and ahead of Kuraly isnt Kuraly "onside"?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, DeNiro said:

I always thought pushing the puck forward still counted as possession whether touching or not.

 

Learn something new every day.

as another posted pointed out, McAvoy's skates weren't inside the zone yet.  A couple inches further along and both Bruins have to tag up.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, SergioMomesso said:

But McAvoy didn’t play the puck until Kuraly cleared. The puck ca re enter the zone and still be in play if no attacking player touches the puck until they all clear. 

You can spin it to be onside but now we are taking someone who has possession of the puck and instead of saying “he has the puck” we have to treat it in intermittent bursts of “he touches the puck for 0.1 seconds, then 0.7 seconds of no possession, then 0.1 seconds of possession, then 0.4 seconds of no possession”  

 

kind of a joke to not call that offside. Very gutless on the refs part. 
 

Kangaroo Court 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Nooks said:

So Kuraly could remain offside and McAvoy could dump it in the corner and go pick it up even if Kuraly is offside for 5-6 seconds and tags up?  I remember back in the day the U.S. used wack offside rules.

nah, the puck was in before Kuraly tagged up, but McAvoy didn't touch the puck until Kuraly tagged up. McAvoy was in an onside position as the puck crossed the blueline.

  • Thanks 1
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, oldnews said:

no - a dump and tag involves actually dumping the puck - ie not possessing it - this on the other hand was an obvious case of possession - McAvoy carries the puck in, with possession, before the 'tag up' = the player is trapped offside - the play is dead.

 

It's an obvious blown call - twice - and the attempt to walk it back as if McAvoy did not possess the puck and move it to himself - over the blueline - with a player trapped offside - is surreal.

I wasn't happy with it either, but I can see it now, it was legit onside, sadly

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, PhillipBlunt said:

You’re like an STD, that never goes away. Maybe there’s a cream for the likes of you. 

Had a lot of STDs have you? 

 

I'll leave mate, try and enjoy yourself tonight and don't get so angry. Remember to take a deep breath sometimes 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Qwags said:

So does losing the puck for a split second now constitute a loss of possession? Every time a player dangles, he now techincally loses and regains possessions?

 

That's madness.

Mcavoy lost the puck on purpose. He didnt touch it on purpose until his teammate touched up. 

 

If anything Mcavoy should be given props for such awareness. Great young player. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...