If you are not a Bruins fan you are absolutely right. If I weren't one, I'd absolutely hate him. As a side note, as a Boston fan, I hated Rodney Harrison ......................... until he late played for the Pats. As they say, you don't root for the man, you root for the uniform!
The Blues will win the series IF the Sharks stay out of the penalty box! The Blues power play stinks but I am not impressed with Martin Jones in goal. I personally love it when his own fans boo him. Thornton looked his age tonight.
https://www.mercurynews.com/2019/05/14/thorntons-defensive-slip-a-postseason-lowlight-for-sharks-veteran/ Thornton’s defensive slip a postseason lowlight for Sharks veteran Joe Thornton has Sharks’ worst playoff plus-minus rating at -7, but teammates keep faith Thornton was also penalized for tripping in the offensive zone with 7:18 left, hampering the Sharks’ comeback effort. He finished with a minus-2 rating Monday night and is a team-worst minus-7 in the playoffs.
Big game tonight for both teams. It's either Boston puts a choke hold on, or Carolina is back in the series.
Thornton is having a good game tonight. Sharks look good, but I expect Boston is too much for them in the end.
WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAT THEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF????? Are you kidding me? 4 refs couldn't see an obvious hand pass? First the terrible call against Vegas and now this?
The NHL has a crisis on their hands, and SJ has benefited from the two most controversial plays these playoffs
I don’t understand why that play isn’t reviewable. Yet a ticky tack offside is. Either use replay for critical plays (like a missed hand pass that led to a goal) or get rid of it altogether. I say get rid of it, there seems to be more controversy with replay then without
I also don't understand because it was a GOAL. I understand a regular hand pass may not be reviewable but GOALS are reviewable and this hand pass led to the goal. So if they can review goal tender interference that led to a goal, why not a hand pass? And they review OFFSIDES all the time and take away a goal. Its crazy. Either be consistent or just get rid of instant replay entirely.
This is right up there with the play in the Bruins / Blue Jackets series when the puck bounced off the netting above the glass, fell back on the ice and Columbus scored. I still can't understand how something like that isn't reviewable. At least in that game, it didn't determine the outcome.
I will correct myself. The Sharks have benefited from the three most controversial plays - the 3rd one being the game 7 goal that was called back on Colorado.
That is exactly right. The rule is very dumb. If it was glove into the net, then it is review-able. But because it went glove / to teammate stick / goal, then it is not review-able. What irks me is just because it didn't go directly into the net after the glove, then it is not review-able. WHO CARES, IT WAS STILL A GLOVE PASS!!! Why have replay if you AREN'T GOING TO USE IT ON THE MOST IMPORTANT PLAYS OF THE GAME????? They review a ticky-tack offside call, that had no bearing on the play, and reverse the goal, yet a play that made the direct result of the game, is non-review-able?? I totally agree
I was friendly with Joe Thornton when he was in Boston, and would love to see him win a Cup. So, I've been rooting for them every post season. Even now, when it seems likely the Bruins will make the Finals, I also want San Jose to get in. If the Bruins were to lose, at least it would take some of the sting away to see Joe win. But, with all of these series swinging/winning calls going their way, I'm rethinking my desire for them to beat St. Louis.