WcF: Chicago Blackhawks vs Los Angeles Kings

[CanuckofSteel]

Blackhawks in 6

I hope Toews and Kane really show up in this series because the Hawks will need them.

[1-d]

Hawks in 6

Blackhawks advancing is much better for the league, for the fans (minus Kings fans of course) and for the game itself. With their speedy and talented players Chicago plays end-to-end hockey, generating excitements on both ends. LA's bread and butter is all about getting physical, owning the puck and giving the other team as few scoring chances as possible.

Yes LA keeps winning because they are so good at forcing their ugly game plan to perfection, but I do not condone what they are doing to the game of hockey. I want our game to be played as it meant to be played - fast, fluid, action-packed with pucks moving 200 ft back and forth. That's what makes hockey so exciting and that is the game I've come to love.

Kings hockey sucks the life out of the game so the sooner they're gone the better.

[Amish Rake Fighter]

Quick's got some rancid numbers against the Hawks

[73 Percent]

anyone else miss big willie as much as I do?

[MRAY]

anyone else miss big willie as much as I do?

I miss salo too

[asian player]

Did he just say replace Weise or Prust with Galchenyuk?

I wouldn't replace the dutch gretzky for toews

[Twilight Sparkle]

toews got screwed on that. bull****. pushed in, then an own goal

[asian player]

QUICK COACH GRAB YOUR CROTCH

[Down by the River]

How the hell was that not a goal (didn't have the volume on)?

[Plum]

YES! Toffoli!

[DeNiro]

Of course that was goalie interference. He pushed Quick's head and body into the net.

Look at the rulebook and you'll see why it's not a goal.

[Down by the River]

Of course that was goalie interference. He pushed Quick's head and body into the net.

Look at the rulebook and you'll see why it's not a goal.

I thought that wasn't a reviewable play, no need to be snarky.

[Shinkaruk_9]

Wow. On one end, a disallowed goal, on the other LA ties the game. Turning point?

[Down by the River]

Toews is great at taking shots through the dman's legs.

[Plum]

I don't know who I am cheering for, I like Darryl Sutter alot but Hawks have alot more respectable Canadiens.

[73 Percent]

I thought that wasn't a reviewable play, no need to be snarky.

ding ding ding ding we have a winner!

[73 Percent]

Of course that was goalie interference. He pushed Quick's head and body into the net.

Look at the rulebook and you'll see why it's not a goal.

look at the rulebook and youll see that a goalie interference play cannot be reviewed. call on the ice should have stood up.

[73 Percent]

69.1 Interference on the Goalkeeper - This rule is based on the premise that an attacking players position, whether inside or outside the crease, should not, by itself, determine whether a goal should be allowed or disallowed. In other words, goals scored while attacking players are standing in the crease may, in appropriate circumstances be allowed. Goals should be disallowed only if: (1) an attacking player, either by his positioning or by contact, impairs the goalkeepers ability to move freely within his crease or defend his goal; or (2) an attacking player initiates intentional or deliberate contact with a goalkeeper, inside or outside of his goal crease. Incidental contact with a goalkeeper will be permitted, and resulting goals allowed, when such contact is initiated outside of the goal crease, provided the attacking player has made a reasonable effort to avoid such contact. The rule will be enforced exclusively in accordance with the on-ice judgment of the Referee(s), and not by means of video replay or review.

[Otis]

Saad

[Down by the River]

69.1 Interference on the Goalkeeper - This rule is based on the premise that an attacking players position, whether inside or outside the crease, should not, by itself, determine whether a goal should be allowed or disallowed. In other words, goals scored while attacking players are standing in the crease may, in appropriate circumstances be allowed. Goals should be disallowed only if: (1) an attacking player, either by his positioning or by contact, impairs the goalkeepers ability to move freely within his crease or defend his goal; or (2) an attacking player initiates intentional or deliberate contact with a goalkeeper, inside or outside of his goal crease. Incidental contact with a goalkeeper will be permitted, and resulting goals allowed, when such contact is initiated outside of the goal crease, provided the attacking player has made a reasonable effort to avoid such contact. The rule will be enforced exclusively in accordance with the on-ice judgment of the Referee(s), and not by means of video replay or review.

Thanks for this.