Cardiff Devils v Belfast Giants - Sun 26 Nov 2017 - League - FO 6pm - Chat/Updates
- Thread starter Nott Simpson
- Start date
I found both the Fife away game and the Belfast game really good to watch despite the latter result. If you think where we were a few months ago where we could not string two passes together. Now the lines are clicking and we are playing some beautiful hockey though some in forms goalies and some problems finishing have cost us. I do get bored of hearing the physical argument every time we lose but I have to admit in the Belfast game the physicality was lacking. They turned the puck over a couple of time with hits but we threw very few.
The frustrating thing about this team is we can see how damn good they can be but they cant seem to be that good consistently. Fortunately fans in other clubs are also feeling the same frustration with their teams. Thats partly down to the time of year and partly due to the league being so competitive this year. Most seasons the teams performing by Christmas are the teams fighting for the title at the end of the season. Time will tell.
The frustrating thing about this team is we can see how damn good they can be but they cant seem to be that good consistently. Fortunately fans in other clubs are also feeling the same frustration with their teams. Thats partly down to the time of year and partly due to the league being so competitive this year. Most seasons the teams performing by Christmas are the teams fighting for the title at the end of the season. Time will tell.
Can somebody explain something to me... I’m pretty sure Fourniers hit on Kurtz wasn’t called as a penalty on Sunday, it didn’t result in injury (he was back on the ice, and had a fight), and it wasn’t a requested review by Belfast. So, how has the hit been reviewed ‘automatically’?!
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
A penalty was not called. If it had a penalty causing injury is an automatic review according to DOPS FAQ on EIHL site but given it is still showing Kirkham as DOPS I don't know how reliable this is
There was no penalty called it was not requested so it looks like DOPS has overstepped the mark here unless what is referred has changed in the latest review
There was no penalty called it was not requested so it looks like DOPS has overstepped the mark here unless what is referred has changed in the latest review
It was claimed to have caused the injury so was reviewed... As DOPS say you can't prove it did as he fought Faryna a couple of minutes later and then left the game! I guess we take it on the chin and move on. Ferland should have been a Game Penalty minimum on the Night so good to see he's been punished properly upon review as it was a very nasty one!
I get all of that. But Fournier falls under none of the above. Not saying he shouldn’t be reprimanded for what did look like a bit of a bad hit, but are DOPS just plucking any incident from games to review now? Despite them not being eligible for automatic review, a review not being requested, and no injury caused as a result of the action?
Keefe is pulling a fast one, claiming that the hit caused an injury, yet he came back onto the ice and fought. ridiculous.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Keefe is pulling a fast one, claiming that the hit caused an injury, yet he came back onto the ice and fought. ridiculous.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
To be fair he was in a bad way initially. He tried to skate out of the wrong door and was visibly shaken when he came off. I sit right behind the away tunnel and he was seeing stars.
The fact he came back out is probably irrelevant. The linesman may have mentioned it to the ref for his report, hence the review.
The fact he came back out is probably irrelevant. The linesman may have mentioned it to the ref for his report, hence the review.
The issue here is not whether injury was caused and then the aftermath
Nor whether a penalty should have been called
Nor whether the. DOPS ruling makes sense and/or is justified
There was no penalty called so it was not up for review by DOPS. It was body contact and maybe caused an injury but without a penalty being called so no DOPS review
TBH I don't have an issue with them reviewing this kind of play but they could be busy and MUST stick to the rules
Nor whether a penalty should have been called
Nor whether the. DOPS ruling makes sense and/or is justified
There was no penalty called so it was not up for review by DOPS. It was body contact and maybe caused an injury but without a penalty being called so no DOPS review
TBH I don't have an issue with them reviewing this kind of play but they could be busy and MUST stick to the rules
I think the point of DOPS reviewing plays where an injury occurred is it might not be a penalty. I suspect the majority of incidents they review will be - legal hit, unfortunate outcome. The point is that DOPS is supposed to be about player safety and any injury of a player makes sense to review. Yes it seems crazy Keefe sent the guy back onto the ice (or the player knows how to fake the rinkside concussion test) but I'd much rather the DOPS be actually interested in player safety which has never been the case before.