The Pronger Poll

[Dacks]

I'm 50/50 on good call / bad call.

It's good because I think it was clear Pronger was trying to block Kipper's vision with his arm, and the league has made it clear that's not allowed (pending confirmation of whether or not 'facing the goalie' is actually in the official rule).

Bad call because of Awaz's point. Calling a penalty shouldn't be dependant on the resulting play.

I will say though, that the league reffing seems to be so confused right now. Between this rule, the headshot rule, goal reviews (I'm thinking of Pens Carolina a few weeks ago) it just looks like nobody's on the same page. I'll defend human error on the refs part all the time, but these types of mistakes are systematic and indicative of a strong lack of training and communication amongst the officials.

 

[SLY]

I'm 50/50 on good call / bad call.

It's good because I think it was clear Pronger was trying to block Kipper's vision with his arm, and the league has made it clear that's not allowed (pending confirmation of whether or not 'facing the goalie' is actually in the official rule).

Bad call because of Awaz's point. Calling a penalty shouldn't be dependant on the resulting play.

I will say though, that the league reffing seems to be so confused right now. Between this rule, the headshot rule, goal reviews (I'm thinking of Pens Carolina a few weeks ago) it just looks like nobody's on the same page. I'll defend human error on the refs part all the time, but these types of mistakes are systematic and indicative of a strong lack of training and communication amongst the officials.

From start to finish on the post, agreed 100%.

 

[elocomotive]

I'm 50/50 on good call / bad call.

It's good because I think it was clear Pronger was trying to block Kipper's vision with his arm, and the league has made it clear that's not allowed (pending confirmation of whether or not 'facing the goalie' is actually in the official rule).

Bad call because of Awaz's point. Calling a penalty shouldn't be dependant on the resulting play.

I will say though, that the league reffing seems to be so confused right now. Between this rule, the headshot rule, goal reviews (I'm thinking of Pens Carolina a few weeks ago) it just looks like nobody's on the same page. I'll defend human error on the refs part all the time, but these types of mistakes are systematic and indicative of a strong lack of training and communication amongst the officials.

Dacks - excellent observation, I looked at the rule and you're right, it's not in there. The rule gives pretty wide latitude to the refs by including the words "including, but not limited to..." And I agree with you on the 50/50. What Pronger did not be outlawed per se, but it doesn't have to be, and the call was consistent with the spirit of the interpretation on the Avery situation.

As to the bolded part, I think it's less about communication and training, and more about rules that have too much nuance and subjectivity. For example, the headshot rule states prohibits ""a lateral, back-pressure or blind-side hit to an opponent where the head is targeted and/or the principal point of contact."" The first bolded part is the nuance, the second is the subjectivity. Why not just make any hit to the head illegal? It makes the job easier for the refs who have tons of rules to keep straight and make decisions on in a matter of split seconds. Reffing is a really difficult job, and I think the NHL does a poor job at managing their rules in a way that make it easier for their referees to call quickly and accurately.

 

[TOX1]

This game never should have gotten to that point.

Even with the lopsided advantage in PP opp's, the Flyer's played down to the Flames, got outworked and lost.




Next game is on in 20 minutes.


GO FLYER'S!!!

 

[juliansteed]

I don't have a strong opinion one way or the other whether or not that should have been a penalty, just as long as they are consistent with it. My problem, as others have mentioned, is that it wasn't going to be called until the goal was scored.

 

[quoipourquoi]

You most certainly do.

Uh, yeah... if you have something to say, AJ, you can say it. We're all adults here.

 

[elocomotive]

Uh, yeah... if you have something to say, AJ, you can say it. We're all adults here.

Oooo...Ooooo... I got this...

 

[elocomotive]

Damn it, no, that's not it... maybe....

 

[elocomotive]

Ugh... how about...

 

[elocomotive]

No... still not it....

Wait, think I got it....

Yes! There we go...

 

[BostonAJ]

Uh, yeah... if you have something to say, AJ, you can say it. We're all adults here.

We have a difference in opinion of the greatness of Chris Pronger. For me he's been good in the playoffs, has had a few really good years, takes a lot of cheap shots, and is a journeyman defenseman.

 

[TOX1]

 

[DaBoltsNIsles]

Bad call. He put his arm down well before the puck got to the goalie.

 

[Dacks]

It's an unsportsmanlike penalty, it doesn't really matter if Pronger did it while a shot was coming in.

 

[flyersfan4706]

It is a bad call. I heard on the radio that after the Avery Incident Campbell released a statement about how you are not allowed to face the goalie, wave your stick facing him, etc. Every season when they hand out rule books players play by them. The Avery Rule was never actually put in the book. Yes, it is unsportsmanlike. It is not a penalty though. Pronger had his back to the goalie, waved his hand, the puck wa played by a Flyers, and shot into the net. The ref called it because of the goal, not because of the play.

Also, you could make a case that Pronger wasn't even using his arm to block Kipper's vision but let's save that for the next Flyers/Pens GNT referee fight.

 

[flyersfan4706]

Bad call, not a Flyers fan, also don't bunch your panties over some meaningless regular season bullshit.

When Calgary beats the Red Wings for the 8th spot by 1 point we should talk.

 

[flyersfan4706]

[YOUTUBE]t-YjlAENy3Y[/YOUTUBE]

 

[Dacks]

I think Lebrun from ESPN explains it well:

Quite the gutsy call by young referee Ghislain Hebert when he disallowed Mike Richards' overtime goal Friday and called Chris Pronger for an unsportsmanlike penalty for waiving his glove in front of Miikka Kiprusoff's face.

We call it the Sean Avery rule but in fact it never was a new rule, more a new interpretation of an existing rule -- unsportsmanlike conduct. The NHL released a memo during the playoffs a few years ago after Avery was waiving his glove in front of Martin Brodeur's face.

I checked with the league on Saturday and this was the first time the penalty had been called for this specific reason since Avery.

"It has not been called since then," Terry Gregson, director of officiating for the NHL, told ESPN.com via email. "The spirit and intent of the USC rule is to keep an acceptable hockey decorum in the game, in this case when a player is screening. This type of act is outside the normal boundaries and needs to be controlled for the good of the game."

Flyers GM Paul Holmgren sent Gregson an e-mail to underline his disagreement with the call and Gregson explained to Holmgren why it was the right one. Personally, I think it was the right call. Pronger's glove was in the face of Kiprusoff -- the tape doesn't lie.

I think that makes it real clear. There is no official rule. It's up to the ref to deem what's unsportsmanlike. Trying to block a goalie's vision with your body is just playing good positional hockey. Tyring to block a goalie's vision with your arms is just being a douche, which is why it was called. Doesn't matter which way you're facing or whether a shot is being taken at the time, because it's unsportsmanlike either way.

The valid gripe you'd have as a Flyer is that the ref didn't call it right away. That's not that infrequent though. You might see a soft hook at centre ice that doesn't get called until the ref realizes the perpetrating team suddenly gets a fast break the other way.

 

[Eddie_Shack]

When Calgary beats the Red Wings for the 8th spot by 1 point we should talk.

lol, there's always that. Hopefully Detroit builds up enough of a cushion in the standings so that their season doesn't come down to a shitty call or play. If not, I can always stalk a ref or two.

 

[TOX1]

Slashing at someone's legs IS a penalty though. In fact some players around the league have had fines and/or suspensions levied against them for doing so, but that's not what we're talking about here, so excuse me.


Maybe when a player quick stops in front of a goalie and ice shavings go into his eyes we should call a penalty for that.

Hey....they should call a penalty against any player that's screening the goalie that's as tall as or taller than the goalie.

or

I got it....maybe they should penalize any player who has manufacturer labels on their sticks that are too shiny.

or, they should have to blacken the reflective side of their blades because they may cause the goalie to lose sight.

or wait....wait....wait...maybe they should change/lower the output strength on the bulbs they use in the ceiling lights because they may be just a tad too strong and the goalies eyes could become blurred.



Pronger didn't intentionally interfere, so it couldn't be a penalty because....well, it wasn't.