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

[GDT] Canucks vs Oilers, 7PM PST December 1, 2019 -- B2B Part 2 Edition

Rate this topic


therodigy

Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, KeslerWho? said:

Eriksson always looks like he's moving through mud haha, including his brain + reaction time 

He's been one of the best Canucks in the first period. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Rindiculous said:

Ok can anyone tell me the rule on why the high stick on Boeser wasn’t at least a single minor?

Because a goal was scored immediately after the infraction. So even if the ref called a penalty, Boeser's  goal would have been on the delayed penalty and negated the pp anyways. So why bother

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, xereau said:

giphy.gif&key=662ed881fcb04e4f8ea2e02ccf

Gonna be short lived when Makar and the Avalanche play a couple more games.

 

But still, Hughes and Makar. The next generation of great defenseman.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Jaimito said:

It is a PR tweet, but he is old enough to see Leetch esp the 94 cup run.

 

He is not the only one comparing QH to Leetch:

 

https://theprovince.com/sports/hockey/nhl/vancouver-canucks/canucks-3-kings-2-so-hughes-has-dazzling-debut-as-losing-streak-ends

 

aqua is actually a fairly smart hockey mind- don't know why people think he's an ape

  • Cheers 1
  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, MattJVD said:

Because a goal was scored immediately after the infraction. So even if the ref called a penalty, Boeser's  goal would have been on the delayed penalty and negated the pp anyways. So why bother

Was a double minor so it should still be a 2 minute PP... 

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, MattJVD said:

Because a goal was scored immediately after the infraction. So even if the ref called a penalty, Boeser's  goal would have been on the delayed penalty and negated the pp anyways. So why bother

Yah but it was a double minor so wouldn’t it negate only one minor?  Major penalties aren’t negated by a goal

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

1 minute ago, Rindiculous said:

Ok can anyone tell me the rule on why the high stick on Boeser wasn’t at least a single minor?

apparently if it happened before the puck crossed the line, it would be a single, after the puck crossed the line would be a double, but at the same time cancels both minors..?

 

so.. 

 

yah..

  • Haha 1
  • Wat 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, MattJVD said:

Because a goal was scored immediately after the infraction. So even if the ref called a penalty, Boeser's  goal would have been on the delayed penalty and negated the pp anyways. So why bother

Should have been a double minor. One would have been negated. Coilers should have had a 2 minute penalty still. 

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...