Flyers vs Tampa GNT

[Winged_Wheel88]

301 Dalspartans!

 

[juliansteed]

Here's a story by TSN about this incident:

Flyers-Lightning game comes to standstill during trap play

The most interesting part I thought was Blob McKenzie's comments as well as those from a couple of players:

Fellow TSN Hockey Insider Bob McKenzie gave his thoughts on the unusual situation.

"The Lightning are playing something called the neutral zone trap, it's only been around as long as the game itself," explained McKenzie. "Now all of a sudden Peter Laviolette orchestrates something that says if they aren't going to play aggressive we aren't going to play aggressive and we're in front of your home fans so let's see how you like that. Let's let this play out and see how it goes."

Some players who watched the game on television tweeted their thoughts as well.

"This games on National TV... Way to sell it boys!" tweeted Toronto Maple Leafs forward Joffrey Lupul.

"Tampa Bay Lightning are chipping away at our escrow 1-3-1 at a time." tweeted Phoenix Coyotes forward Paul Bissonnette.

Kind of funny that a Coyotes player would complain about chipping away at the escrow. :P Not saying it's the players' fault for the situation in Phoenix but I just find it rather ironic.

 

[puckhead]

 

[rares]

I knew a circle once. It went back around and kicked me in the ass when I wasn't paying attention.

Is this you? :p

 

[Winged_Wheel88]

LMAO, I remember busting a gut when watching that episode.

Stupid spread rep thing.

 

[Winged_Wheel88]

Is this you? :p

No, but that's how I feel every waking moment.

 

[DaBoltsNIsles]

I thought what the Flyers did was cool. I hope other teams do it. I hate the trap. It's one of the reasons I won't watch Devils games unless I need some sleep.

 

[juliansteed]

At first I thought the faceoff should at least come out of the Flyers' zone, maybe not all the way to center but at least to where most of the offside faceoffs happen. But the more I think about it the more I agree with Boss and others. I think having the faceoff in the Flyers' zone makes sense. I don't like the trap anymore than anyone else but until there is a rule banning it the onus has to be on the team with possession to make their move and it's upto the defense to react to said move but they can set up however they want in the meantime. In football if the offense doesn't like the way the defense is set-up they don't get to wait around until they set-up a way they feel is more favorable to them. In baseball a pitcher doesn't get to hold the ball until the batter changes position his position in the batter's box, or decides to switch hit to the pitcher's liking. Basketball I guess addresses the issue from both sides. Apparently they have something call illegal defense but I have no idea what that is but they also have a shot clock. If the NHL wants to come up with some definitive rule to get rid of the trap then so be it, but in the meantime I think the onus should be on the team with possession to adjust to it. If they can't or choose not to breakout of their zone and nothing is happening then that is where the faceoff should be.

 

[juliansteed]

Also I don't think the fans in attendance got ripped off at all. It may not have been the most exciting hockey play but it was a different type of excitement. People love contraversy and this certainly was contraversial and relatively unique. It would have been pretty interesting to see both benches standing up and chirping at the other team. I think it lasted just long enough to make it an interesting occurrence without ruining the entire game. Plus I don't think tickets in Tampa are all that much anyway. Now if this starts becoming the norm to the point where it is no longer considered contraversial then the NHL will have big problems.

 

[IPostedWhat]

Also I don't think the fans in attendance got ripped off at all.

I think all the booing says otherwise?

Unless Mr. Burns was in attendance that is?

 

[juliansteed]

I think all the booing says otherwise?

Unless Mr. Burns was in attendance that is?

I don't think it says that at all. In fact its part of what I was talking about when I mentioned it wasn't an exciting hockey play but it's contraversial and therefore interesting. Look how much it's being talked about in comparison to so many other games. People boo at sporting events all the time. It's often part of the fun.

Also one could certainly say just as easily that all the cheering when their team won an overtime thriller is proof that they got their money's worth and perhaps more.

 

[IPostedWhat]

Look how much it's being talked about in comparison to so many other games.

Yeah, but people aren't saying positive things about it, and the last thing the NHL needs is this game becoming what people think is the norm.

 

[juliansteed]

Yeah, but people aren't saying positive things about it, and the last thing the NHL needs is this game becoming what people think is the norm.

Whether people are saying positive or negative about it doesn't really matter all that much. If people are talking about it then it's a topic of interest/contraversy. It's a pretty unique situation. I'm sure people who were at the game are enjoying all the contraversy it has created and being able to say "hey I was at that game!", not to mention the fact their team eventually won it in overtime.

 

[IPostedWhat]

What did ESPN have to say about it?

That is the only thing that really matters when you think about it.

 

[juliansteed]

What did ESPN have to say about it?

That is the only thing that really matters when you think about it.

Hahaha not sure. I'm sure people will see it differently but if I was in attendance I would have been booing along with everyone else but at the same time would probably be quite entertained by it, and after the fact probably think that it was pretty awesome. If this started happening regularly in games to the point where it wasn't conraversial anymore I'd probably never watch a game again.

 

[IPostedWhat]

but if I was in attendance I would have been booing along with everyone else but at the same time would probably be quite entertained by it.

I would of been too busy yelling, "SHOOT!", with all the PP's in the game.

 

[awaz]

At first I thought the faceoff should at least come out of the Flyers' zone, maybe not all the way to center but at least to where most of the offside faceoffs happen. But the more I think about it the more I agree with Boss and others. I think having the faceoff in the Flyers' zone makes sense. I don't like the trap anymore than anyone else but until there is a rule banning it the onus has to be on the team with possession to make their move and it's upto the defense to react to said move but they can set up however they want in the meantime. In football if the offense doesn't like the way the defense is set-up they don't get to wait around until they set-up a way they feel is more favorable to them. In baseball a pitcher doesn't get to hold the ball until the batter changes position his position in the batter's box, or decides to switch hit to the pitcher's liking. Basketball I guess addresses the issue from both sides. Apparently they have something call illegal defense but I have no idea what that is but they also have a shot clock. If the NHL wants to come up with some definitive rule to get rid of the trap then so be it, but in the meantime I think the onus should be on the team with possession to adjust to it. If they can't or choose not to breakout of their zone and nothing is happening then that is where the faceoff should be.

i disagree..

in football, you cant, the play clock will run out

in baseball, i'm not sure you can say they dont, its certainly slow enough that the pitcher could be waiting for the batter to change up his grip

and the game was going to be boring regardless.. any game with a team that plays the trap is going to be boring.. you cant fault the flyers for trying to force them to be less boring.. the trap is a way of playing defense.. not skating at it is a counter to that, just like the trap is a counter to playing legitimate hockey

if there was a legit rule that required a faceoff i'd be ok with it being in the flyers zone for 'delay of game'.. but when you keep the puck moving there is no penalty, so i'm not sure why the ref kept blowing the whistle (didnt read the whole thread, i apologize if this has been answered)

 

[Vadered]

At first I thought the faceoff should at least come out of the Flyers' zone, maybe not all the way to center but at least to where most of the offside faceoffs happen. But the more I think about it the more I agree with Boss and others. I think having the faceoff in the Flyers' zone makes sense. I don't like the trap anymore than anyone else but until there is a rule banning it the onus has to be on the team with possession to make their move and it's upto the defense to react to said move but they can set up however they want in the meantime. In football if the offense doesn't like the way the defense is set-up they don't get to wait around until they set-up a way they feel is more favorable to them. In baseball a pitcher doesn't get to hold the ball until the batter changes position his position in the batter's box, or decides to switch hit to the pitcher's liking. Basketball I guess addresses the issue from both sides. Apparently they have something call illegal defense but I have no idea what that is but they also have a shot clock. If the NHL wants to come up with some definitive rule to get rid of the trap then so be it, but in the meantime I think the onus should be on the team with possession to adjust to it. If they can't or choose not to breakout of their zone and nothing is happening then that is where the faceoff should be.

Disagree.

In football the play clock exists because there is no other way for the defense to force action. If there were not a play clock then the first team to get the ball with the lead could sit on it for the duration of the half. In hockey, you can forecheck.

In baseball the game length is determined not by time but by outs. If there was not a rule for delay of game then a pitcher could literally wait to pitch until the opposing batter fell asleep. The batter cannot force the action. In hockey, you can forecheck.

Basketball's shot clock or 10 second violation would be the best analogy, but still inappropriate. A skilled player in basketball can keep the ball away from an equally skilled defender forever one on one. He just has to dribble in circles away from the defender and there is no way the guy can get the ball. If he is double teamed, he passes to the open guy. This is not analogous to hockey because it is significantly more difficult to avoid turning it over one on one when the defender is allowed to target his opponent's body. It is also more difficult to pass around or over a defender with any degree of accuracy. Furthermore, in basketball, the offense can use the entire court; hockey's offsides rule means that even if a player does loft it over his opponents' heads, he has a very narrow window to actually connect with the pass.

Basically the other sports all have rules like this to force the action to occur. Hockey doesn't need it because it allows forechecking which, performed well, has a very high success rate in forcing some type of play by the offense. Furthermore, and most importantly, nobody really wants a team to sit in their own zone all game, even the guys doing it, and if the other guys are complaining that they don't have any way to play the puck while holed up in the trap, then maybe they should fucking come and get it.

 

[TiLoBrown]

Devils this, Devils that. Fuck you motherfuckers . Atleast the Devils win when we "trap". And it may be because its early, but I dont recall any Devil just standing with the puck without even trying to move forward. I do recall Doc Emric mention the Penguins excellent use of the trap in recent years though.

 

[PhillyPhaithful48]

Devils this, Devils that. Fuck you motherfuckers . Atleast the Devils win when we "trap". And it may be because its early, but I dont recall any Devil just standing with the puck without even trying to move forward. I do recall Doc Emric mention the Penguins excellent use of the trap in recent years though.

Yes but if you watch this trap, it is so far back that their entire team is in the neutral zone, minus one guy who is so far back that he is awaiting any kind of dump and chase.

Flyers did the right thing. The hockey world is furious with Tampa. End of story.