Chadd

As with most situations in the NHL, published rules and past practice are not always in sync.

I'm just going by past practice, this is nothing new at all. You can have incidental contact and a goal, incidental contact and no goal and intentional contact and no goal. Essentially they are saying that there was no intent to hit the goalie, but there was too much contact for the goalie to have had any chance at stopping the puck. When I read this part of the rule one thing pops out at me: I don't believe the guy (Leino?) made any attempt to avoid contact. He may not have intended to run Fluery, but he certainly didn't do anything to avoid him. The funny thing is, I can recall a number of situations where this has happened in the past, but even the NHL chart doesn't seem to address it. http://www.nhl.com/ice/page.htm?id=26557

Incidental simply means no penalty in that case, the NHL rules have an option to disallow the goal but not issue a penalty.

Disallowed goal was the right call and probably should have been a penalty. The contact was absolutely intentional. The thrown stick was a missed call, but that is almost never called.

Not at all, Pens dominated the play and seemed to win just about every race to a loose puck. I'm just amazed at how Cooke seems to always get away with so much.

Cooke really should have had a penalty for holding the stick before his goal today. The worst part is that it happened right in front of the ref and there was still no call.

Fortunately my PD never heard me swear, the APD on the other hand....

The funny thing about concussions is you start feeling better and think you're ready to go back, long before you are actually well enough to go back. If I was playing in a checking league, I wouldn't be anywhere near the ice right now.

If they could extend him for similar money, that's not a bad signing.

You better hope it's a regional subsidiary, most of the United flight attendants are old enough to be your mother. On a less pleasant note, I found out today that my grandfather has bladder cancer.

This is the part you have to watch. Many hockey bags will exceed the 62 linear inches. It all depends on how anal they want to be at the check-in counter but at least it will only be $25 each way if you have a smaller bag.

But then Sid couldn't make his cross zone passes to the cutting defenseman.

Oversize bags. Put them in regular size bags and those fees go down quickly.

NHL rules, who the hell knows anymore? Both of those were pretty obvious calls and should have been made. There were also a couple equally obvious tripping calls and a high stick on Eaton that weren't called the other way.

I'm watching the FSN feed and even they admit the Pens got away with several things that should have been called.

I don't want to hear any Pens fan bitching about officials after the game tonight.

It's hard for me to remember age ranges on here and don't want to give age inappropriate advice. When I was 26 I would have asked what he was waiting for, I've mellowed a bit since then.

Who could they get in free agency for that much that would be better?

Since you say "kid" I'm going to guess you're talking about high school or college age. If you decide to dip out, I would strongly suggest letting a school counselor and the other guy's parents know what is going on. Perhaps even the girls parents as well. To do this, you must end things with the chick on good terms and you must be the one to walk away. It's not the easiest way, but the right thing rarely is. If you stick with the chick, I would still consider letting the same people know what is going on, but there is a good chance that things will blow up with the chick if you go down this road. In any event, the way to handle it is to express concern for the mental condition of the other guy without making it look like you are just jealous. He could need medication, counseling or a swift kick in the ass but that's up to someone else.

The penalty that should have been called on the Gagne hit would have wiped out the second goal.

If she isn't willing to do that, forcing the issue will become a wedge. Let her know that you will support her should she want to file harassment charges, but leave the decision up to her. If he starts calling you, then you can do something about it.

The closest one to conclusive for me was the low angle zoomed in, but they didn't hold it long enough to look all that closely. They were going crazy about the overhead angles, but anytime you zoom the same shot and it doesn't support your case it's hard to call that conclusive.

The Flyers got away with as much as Ottawa and none of the angles on the goal were definitive. The hit on Gagne being the only "missed call" that I can agree with.

Exactly why I said "IF"

If the NHLPA was smart (and thought the players were clean) they would organize a full team test to put this behind them before the playoffs.