So what happened?
Too many undisciplined penalties in the third period derailed a comeback attempt by the Penguins. The Pens were whistled for four straight minor penalties in the second half of the third period, leading to extended time for the Rangers on a two-man advantage, and a complete inability on the part of the Pens to get any offense going.
The problem is, if the PK hadn't faltered twice earlier in the game, the Pens would never have been in this position. The Rangers first two attempts were both a success. Neither one was what you'd call a weak or soft goal allowed by Fleury - it was just not good enough as a team effort on the PK.
The other issue was that I think the Pens got caught up in playing the physical game against the Rangers. They were successful at it in the first period, when the Rangers took most of the penalties, but the Pens were whistled for six of the last seven calls. You could have predicted it as soon as you saw John Tortorellawhining talking to the refs before the second period. One conversation, six out of seven calls against the Pens. It's like MAGIC!
There were lots of other things that could be pointed out, but let's just say that this was pretty crappy and leave it at that. Amazing that they almost got at least one point out of it.
It was a nice almost-comeback while it lasted.
The problem is, if the PK hadn't faltered twice earlier in the game, the Pens would never have been in this position. The Rangers first two attempts were both a success. Neither one was what you'd call a weak or soft goal allowed by Fleury - it was just not good enough as a team effort on the PK.
The other issue was that I think the Pens got caught up in playing the physical game against the Rangers. They were successful at it in the first period, when the Rangers took most of the penalties, but the Pens were whistled for six of the last seven calls. You could have predicted it as soon as you saw John Tortorella
There were lots of other things that could be pointed out, but let's just say that this was pretty crappy and leave it at that. Amazing that they almost got at least one point out of it.
It was a nice almost-comeback while it lasted.
Who scored?
Neal (14), Malkin (9), Dupuis (7)
The Good?
- Sid had two more points. Geno and Neal both scored.
- No one else was hurt.
- I thought Bortuzzo played well, albeit in limited action.
- Nice job by the PK in the third period to kill off four minors and over two minutes down by two men.
The Bad?
- I almost don't know what to save for The Ugly... but here goes:
- Kennedy, on the Rangers second goal, appeared to be confused by cris-crossing players and left Mitchell all alone in the middle long enough to blast a great shot past Flower.
- The PK in the second period, allowing two goals on the two calls against the Pens.
- Taking four minor penalties in the space of five minutes in the latter half of the third period.
- Only managing three shots on net during that third period. It wasn't like they were throwing pucks that didn't make it, either - that number was pretty indicative of how things went.
The Ugly?
- Saving the best for last - the faceoffs. The Pens won just 17 out of the 57 draws. If you eliminate Sid's 9 out of 20, the other Pens won just 8 out of 37. That's really sad.
Any Surprises?
- I didn't know a high-stick on the puck had to be "controlled" by the other team before it could go in their own net. Matt Cooke had a goal disallowed after he put a high stick on the puc when the War Room in Toronto said a puck bouncing off of Lundqvist and being batted in by Sauer. Bob Errey mentioned that the rulebook doesn't say anything about "control"... maybe they made it up?
What's their record now?
The Pens are 14-7-4.
Who's next?
Off to face the Caps on Thursday with their new coach, Dale Hunter.
1 comment:
"Disallowed Goal – When an attacking player causes the puck to
enter the opponent’s goal by contacting the puck above the height of
the crossbar, either directly or deflected off any player or official, the
goal shall not be allowed. The determining factor is where the puck
makes contact with the stick. If the puck makes contact with the stick
below the level of the crossbar and enters the goal, this goal shall be
allowed." - http://www.nhlofficials.com/images/2010-2011RuleBookv1.pdf
emphasis mine. I guess it could be argued the puck was deflected off the defensive player, but to me it looked more like the guy batted the puck in. I would have called it a goal, but there is some grey area there.
Post a Comment