Comments on: Inbred Referees 2 / Caps 1

By: Johnny

Johnny — Mon, 10 Mar 2008 14:18:31 +0000

Who wrote sucker punch? A fast left to the face of an opponent coming straight at you with a stick is not a sucker punch! It is smart self defense! “Sucker punch” is a word used by losers to justify poor reaction time! However, the call on Cooke was a sign that should have been heeded. In my humble opinion if a player is so ruffed up that his opponent gets a 5min major and a game misconduct, he should not get to skate in the PP….

By: mark

mark — Mon, 10 Mar 2008 14:13:50 +0000

Brashear lost this game for them, plain and simple. They could have killed 4 minutes, but not 6 (which led to the 2-men PPs). I like Brash, but that was undisciplined and selfish during a critical time of a critical game.

By: Chris Green

Chris Green — Sun, 09 Mar 2008 20:41:16 +0000

Brashear was goaded into knocking out a Bruin with a nice left. His play for the balance of the season has been solid. Note to the critics, he keeps the opposition at bay when they think they can run Ovie or Semin, or anyone else for that matter. He is also a steady veteran on a team full of rookies….
The officiating hurts a major conspiracy theory that the NHL controls them for their own purpose. It would be a cinderella story for the Caps to make the playoffs, when they were mired at 14th at the mid season mark.
Ovie is why we are getting national tv coverage. I would think the NHL would like to play that story up with coach Boudreau and all…

By: hockeygrl_76

hockeygrl_76 — Sun, 09 Mar 2008 14:30:28 +0000

From my vantage point at the game I have to say we lost this one for ourselves. Brash knows better and while the Cooke incident was bullcrap that wasn’t where things went wrong. What went wrong was Brash taking a stupid penalty…the high sticking one I can forgive but the roughing?…give me a break…way to let the team down. The Erskine call I think was borderline but valid. I even rewatched it again this morning and have to agree with that one (would the refs had let it go had the Cooke incident not happened? Possibly) and the Poti one I wasn’t sure about but when I watched the replay this morning Joe B and Locker seemed to agree with it but thought the Bruins should have also been called for a hooking incident. We outplayed them the whole game until the end. I hate to say it but if this team can’t not take stupid penalties then they aren’t going to make it to the playoffs. I hope Erskine and Brash sit for a couple games. Oh and by the way I really don’t think Flash and Semin should be on a line together…

By: Lorne

Lorne — Sun, 09 Mar 2008 12:38:06 +0000

Donald Brashear = Chris Simon
That one act may have cost our team the playoffs. If he can’t control himself he doesn’t belong in the league anymore. Everyone is fortunate that his sucker punch didn’t result in injury. This had the potential to be as bad as Bertuzzi/Moore. Sure he didn’t ride on his back or anything like that, but let’s not even think what an unexpected blow to the head like that could have done.

By: Grooven

Grooven — Sun, 09 Mar 2008 05:16:04 +0000

Had a long answer that didn’t go through.
Instead of retyping it all, here’s the crux.
Maybe this’ll help clarify for you.
There’s a difference between an offense being deficient, and one not taking advantage of the situation. If the Caps had taken advantage earlier in the game that might’ve been enough of a buffer –or a game killer that it wouldn’t have mattered if Boston took advantage at the end of the game (which they did).

By: NS2NOVA

NS2NOVA — Sun, 09 Mar 2008 01:06:56 +0000

When you look at the breakdown of the calls, something obvious jumps out, and I brought this up on the boards during the game.
With the exception of Cooke’s bad call in the second, the game went 36 min and 29 seconds without a call. I have yet to see a game go that long without something being called, or badly missed.
But that being said, after the first 5 on 3 goal didn’t bring a man back on the ice, the guys should have realized that they had to play a more disciplined game. We lost because of stupid penalties, pure and simple.
As for dumping Brash, or stripping him of his “A” that has been one of the more irrational comments I’ve heard in a while. One bad incident does not make him a pariah. I’ve been impressed with Brash’s play this year, his fight numbers are a lot lower than you would expect from a man with his reputation. And it’s reputation that has him on this team and keeps him on this team. I’m quite sure that there have been many aggressors who have had second thoughts about dropping the gloves while Brash was on the ice. And Brash has provided veteran leadership for a team that lacks experience, and will continue to do so.
Hnidy deserved every pound of force that was delivered to his face. But Brash should have done it a lot sooner than he did. Perhaps when Erskine challenged him on the hit on OV. Brash knew he blew it. And you could see how bad and small he was feeling when they showed him leaving the bench at the end of the game. He WILL take this game chalk it up to a bad move on his part, learn from it, and move on. But do not make him a pariah for doing something that almost anyone would have done.
And we can’t look at this as the straw that broke and kept us out of the playoffs. For that we can only lay the blame on the poor performance at the start of the year. The fact that we’ve been able to come back this far is a testament to the players and coaching we have.
Let them have a bad day, they’ll get through it, so should we.
(just my opinion, nothing humble about it)

By: pucksandbooks

pucksandbooks — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 23:52:52 +0000

I confess, I’m at a loss in understanding the sentiment that because the Caps had achieved ONLY a 1-0 lead, on the road, against a solidly winning hockey club — and one who’d won almost all of the previous four seasons’ worth of games contested between the clubs in this building, that somehow the Caps had produced a deficient effort Saturday afternoon. There’s absolutely nothing wrong with a 1-0 hockey game — particularly when winning it on the road.
Instead, the onus in such a superbly competitive game is for the referees to allow the two teams to battle it out until the bitter end — rather than determine it themselves. For whatever reason, today’s assigned crew couldn’t do this, and we ought to be grateful, I suppose, that what we saw today was anomalous: were more NHL games to look like this one in its conclusion, it would surely drive fans away.

By: OrderedChaos (Mike Rucki)

OrderedChaos (Mike Rucki) — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 23:42:27 +0000

Like I said, the Cooke penalty set the tone: Notice that Adams was AOK later, skating fine. Cooke maybe, MAYBE, deserved a 2-minute penalty for interference. No more than that. The 5-minute major and the game misconduct broadcast loud and clearly that the refs were named O’Shea and McWhatever, and were wholly on the side of the Bruins.
Yes, the way the Caps played in the first 50 minutes should have yielded more than one goal. And had it done so, perhaps they would have won despite the refs’ terrible work. But the refs jobbed the Capitals today, no doubt about it.

By: Novaron

Novaron — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 23:20:52 +0000

When the Refs make calls against one and do not make clear calls against another team, then one can blame the refs. If they call the clear penalty on Chara, then perhaps there is no penalty call on Poti during the 4 on 4 as opposed to the a pk. And then after the 4-4 ends we can kill the rest of the Brasheer penalty. Bear in mind the Caps were 4-1 in games offciated by these two prior to this game.