|
Post by stirlingflyer on Mar 9, 2014 18:20:11 GMT
Lachowicz (Farmer) 58:38 ENG
5-2 Panthers
|
|
|
Post by stirlingflyer on Mar 9, 2014 18:23:10 GMT
Flyers PP following multiple penalties
|
|
|
Post by riverrat on Mar 9, 2014 18:23:39 GMT
Game over. Panthers get an empty netter. Moot point but he was in the crease as well.
|
|
|
Post by stirlingflyer on Mar 9, 2014 18:23:50 GMT
Clarke and Fulton roughing. Kalus high sticks at 59:12.
|
|
|
Post by stirlingflyer on Mar 9, 2014 18:24:22 GMT
Final score Panthers 5 Flyers 2
|
|
|
Post by elaine59 on Mar 9, 2014 18:26:04 GMT
Rubbish 3rd period by Flyers.Dont think they (Panthers) were that good.
|
|
|
Post by stirlingflyer on Mar 9, 2014 18:27:08 GMT
Panthers MoM Matt Francis. Flyers MoM Matt Reber.
Third period shots 12-12.
|
|
flyersfaninspain
Pro
Posts: 1,084
EIHL Team: Fife Flyers
NHL Team: Tampa Bay Lightning
|
Post by flyersfaninspain on Mar 10, 2014 0:30:45 GMT
Thanks for the updates stirling. Flyers still have work to do, but..PODEMOS
|
|
|
Post by harlan on Mar 10, 2014 9:03:33 GMT
Overall a very decent game of hockey.
I thought we deserved our one goal lead going into the third period too.
First period Panthers were all over the place, their passing wasn't going to sticks and they coughed up the puck a few times under Flyers pressure. I haven't seen a Panthers team do that in Nottingham for ages.
Neilson seemed to believe that Flyers D was slow as he left a man high at the Flyers blue line when we were attacking in the Panthers zone many a time, so it was mainly 4 on 4 hockey when we were in their zone
Third period we seemed to come out unprepared for Panthers after all we hadn't seen anything like the Panthers team of the third period in the first 40 minutes and once we went two goals down I thought we looked tired and had run out of energy to get ourselves back into the game.
Impossible to say whether Panthers first goal should have stood or not, it was at the other end of the ice from where we were sitting. The goal we had washed out though should definitley have stood as Haines certainly got his stick to the puck to push it under Kowaslki after Roehl kicked it towards goal.
Does anybody know if the rule about a player being in the crease changes when there is no netminder because Lachowicz was certainly in the crease, not that it makes a huge difference. 5-2 was a little harsh on us though.
No complaints about the game, the better team overall won it but Flyers certainly contributed and gave a good performance
|
|
|
Post by sparkymark75 on Mar 10, 2014 10:19:17 GMT
Rule 471(Disallowing a goal).4 states;
"If an attacking player stands or holds his stick in the goal crease when the puck enters the goal net, unless he has been physically interfered with, by the action of any defending player so as to cause him to be in the goal crease when the puck enters the goal net, unless if in the opinion of the Referee, he had sufficient time to get out of the crease or unless Rule 470 applies."
|
|
finchy
Pro
Posts: 1,567
EIHL Team: Fife Flyers
NHL Team: New Jersey Devil
|
Post by finchy on Mar 10, 2014 12:04:29 GMT
Like I said on THF- amazing that eagle eyed Hicks missed that one. Lachowicz had both skates in the crease. Makes no difference but yet another example of incompetance.
|
|
|
Post by Dirty Lyle on Mar 10, 2014 13:18:16 GMT
I think that Regan was saying panthers first had a man in the crease as well, that's why hewas going daft nothing to do with high sticks
|
|
|
Post by sparkymark75 on Mar 10, 2014 14:15:16 GMT
I think that Regan was saying panthers first had a man in the crease as well, that's why hewas going daft nothing to do with high sticks At first, I thought they were claiming Clarke put it in with his hand. What really annoyed me was the the "commentary" duo on Premier Sports. Not one of them acknowledged the fact that Haines had put the puck in, not Roehl. They even acknowledged they got a lot of tweets but didn't go into details. It was almost like he was afraid to ruffle any feathers. I enjoyed Paul Romanuk's commentary better.
|
|
|
Post by riverrat on Mar 10, 2014 14:48:26 GMT
I enjoyed Paul Romanuk's commentary better. That's like comparing The Hockey News with Slapshot Scotland. Murphy's got to start somewhere. Not many more qualified hockey commentators in the world than Romanuk. Don't know why they ignored what was obvious on replay though.
|
|
|
Post by elaine59 on Mar 10, 2014 17:22:40 GMT
Look forward to next seasons 2 disallowed goals against Panthers.At least it's consistent.
|
|