Devils Vs Blaze - League - 26th Dec 25 - FO 16:00

Jonesy83

Jonesy83

Well-Known Member
#21
#21
Ocko said:
Brandt fought and delivered multiple punches to an unwilling combatant. At no point did he fight back or have his gloves off (or really even have the chance to). By the letter of the law that’s a GM and review. The hit was a a good hit, nothing wrong with it.

If he would’ve fought back it would’ve been an instigator, but he didn’t so it’s a straight 5+ Game.
Click to expand...
So basically barrow should have tucked tail and not fought back and we’d have been even.

When have you ever seen that call before?
Batch battered a Belfast player 2 seasons ago for boarding and he had 2 mins for roughing.
I’ve seen the same multiple times in different leagues and I’ve never seen it called that one sided.
 
JC23

JC23

Well-Known Member
#22
#22
Wannabe2 said:
Great game best of the season, aweful officiating but very entertaining indeed, one thing that really pissed me off though was we conceeded 4 goals in 4 mins,and the idiot playing the music again plays (I Don’t Care ) well if we don’t bloody care we wouldn’t be there. This shit song was played many many years ago and was a friggin shit joke in those days, who the hell thinks this is a good idea get a grip, it sucks. On the upside Megaphone man wasn’t there and the crowd proved he wasn’t missed. Look forward to tomorrow’s game now.
Click to expand...
He definitely WAS there.
 
A

August04 3.0

Active Member
#25
#25
It was nice to hear chants starting from all sections of the rink tonight, made a really pleasant change from the tone deaf dirge of the “atmosphere killer” when he has the megaphone out. Gamewise, we made hard work of that but showed great character to come back and take the win. I’m not usually one to complain about physical play but it was a bit daft from Brandt, the hit from the Coventry player wasn’t bad, and the PP cost us dear. Appalling PK and non existing netminding during that kill and Bowns looked off his game all night. Hopefully Stoever will be back in the line up soon, I fear that we are very exposed having to rely solely on Bowns with a young back up. 2 more valuable points, same again tomorrow please.
 
E

Earnie

Well-Known Member
#28
#28
Brandt did what Brandt does. I don’t have a problem.
The utterly hopeless following powerkill and goal keeping was everybody else’s fault.
To win in regulation was to everyone’s credit — brilliant.
That’s why we love hockey!
 
Devils86

Devils86

Well-Known Member
#29
#29
1st period was dull, so nothing really to it. One of the drabbest periods this season.

2nd period, boy did that have everything. We started well. Having seen the videos on twitter, Riley goes after the Blaze coward and fair enough gets the major. I do seem to remember something before that which should have been called and ramped up the temperature before the decent shoulder on Ritchie by the Blaze lad.

PK and netminding were not good enough. Would BB conceding 4 in one major mean he could have been pulled had we had a senior backup on the bench? I appreciate that's a sensitive topic on here for a number of reasons.

Barrow fight: Blaze guy throws punches with gloves on before both drop their gloves. Seems that Coventry have an issue with whether to keep their gloves on or not.

We deserved the win in the end. Not our best performance and far from the best game of the season, but.....

Last season we would have lost that for sure

Edit, to add: arena was flat, too much turkey all around lol
 
Last edited:
O

Ocko

Well-Known Member
#30
#30
Jonesy83 said:
So basically barrow should have tucked tail and not fought back and we’d have been even.

When have you ever seen that call before?
Batch battered a Belfast player 2 seasons ago for boarding and he had 2 mins for roughing.
I’ve seen the same multiple times in different leagues and I’ve never seen it called that one sided.
Click to expand...
In regards to your point about Barrow, well yes of course that’s the case. If he hadn’t of dropped the gloves as well and instead got a beat down like Brandt gave I’d of expected the same call. Whether that would’ve happened we will never know.

The call is literally black and white in the EIHL and IIHF rule book under aggressor. Having played no part in the fight the Coventry player cannot be given a penalty. Fournier actually had a ban for this last year off the top of my head. Lots of examples online if you google hard enough.

For what it’s worth, I’m glad he did do it. I would always want to see the fight over him not doing it but rules are the rules. I’m not his coach so couldn’t care less about the penalty, I just care about being entertained.
 
Last edited:
B

BostonBart22

Well-Known Member
#31
#31
Great highlights once again , glad the devils have upped their game in that dept, onto brandt I think he will get from dops is a fine and or a game ban for fighting an unwilling player, the hit was fair I thought or the devils will pull him from today's game, as with gart hunt when he done fossier for Nottingham in a game a few weeks back , the next day they were playing fife and took hunt out of squad for his own safety, rumours were at the time tetlow was gunning for him the next night .
 
R

Rempel16

Well-Known Member
#32
#32
BostonBart22 said:
Great highlights once again , glad the devils have upped their game in that dept, onto brandt I think he will get from dops is a fine and or a game ban for fighting an unwilling player, the hit was fair I thought or the devils will pull him from today's game, as with gart hunt when he done fossier for Nottingham in a game a few weeks back , the next day they were playing fife and took hunt out of squad for his own safety, rumours were at the time tetlow was gunning for him the next night .
Click to expand...
Hunt would have destroyed Tetlow.

And having seen that hit it was clearly an awkward fall that did the damage, nothing to do with the hit itself.
 
Finny

Finny

Well-Known Member
#33
#33
I’m going to disagree that the hit on Richardson was clean. He’s chasing after the puck and the jostling for position puts him off balance and in a vulnerable position.
At best the hit is Interference. It’s a dangerous distance from the boards. And after slowing it down it looks like there might be some contact with the head.
Constable made some very questionable plays last season and I’m glad Brandt did what he did.
 
B

BostonBart22

Well-Known Member
#34
#34
Rempel16 said:
Hunt would have destroyed Tetlow.

And having seen that hit it was clearly an awkward fall that did the damage, nothing to do with the hit itself.
Click to expand...
A bit like tetlows hit on ben last season that broke his arm and no one stepped up even until today, tetlow should've been dealt with the next game with panthers , but no, so obviously PR put the blocks on that with his non contact game and toughness in the team last season .
 
E

E.D.S.

Well-Known Member
#35
#35
What a game. I can just imagine Mr King and the owners standing up, Gladiator style asking "are you not entertained?" I would be if I was them

Well I bloody was! Similar to Sheffield last week, if we'd have lost that I would have gone home a happy punter. Up until the Brandt penalty, we dominated in a way that I've not seen us do for a while. Every facet of our game was clicking. It was brilliant to watch.
Whilst clearly our PK had the night off yesterday - I can't ever imagine that happening again - that was pure madness. Good to see Thommo use his Time Out wisely.

Credit to Sanford. I give him more stick than most but I actually saw him skate with a real purpose and desire for once and I think I saw the Kontos that Thommo/Franny see. He seemed to pull the strings last night and control the game.

The Brandt penalty. Hindsight is a wonderful thing. If we'd have killed that penalty without conceding I don't think it would have made the headlines it has. Hindsight tells me it was a daft penalty to take for a relative nothing hit but the real me is delighted Brandt did what he did. Pure entertainment. If you take that out of Brandt, you'd end up with a lesser player in my view. For the past 3 seasons, I've been demanding a team who show up for their team mates and have some bite to them. We have that this year and I love it.

What I'm more interested in finding out is the length of game ban for the Blaze player who cross checked Sanford once to knock him over and then again when he was on his knees, defenceless facing away from the player, he took another one to the neck guard. Again, credit to Joey for dropping them and jumping in. You know if must have been a bad one if Joey's getting involved. To just award 2 mins for that was madness.

The team showed unreal character to come back and win that. Superb effort and fantastic entertainment.
 
E

E.D.S.

Well-Known Member
#36
#36
Blimey. Two highlights packages that actually show highlights. Thank you folks.

I think I enjoy a Lacroix goal as much as a Brandt goal. What a guy. Barrow was superb again. He dealt with his flight well and worked tirelessly all night. The return match is likely to be interesting. Whether you rest Riley or not, it's going to kick off. I'd rather have him in the team if he isn't banned.
 
Mooney#16

Mooney#16

Well-Known Member
#37
#37
You used to hear it referred to as the code. Those that never played could never understand it but yesterday was a throw back example and I’m all for it. The code is Ritchie is so universally respected for his style of play and contribution to the league that he is regarded as untouchable. You do not deliver anything resembling a dodgy hit on Ritchie or you will get a slap. The hit thrown was interference and sent Ritchie to the boards awkwardly. You know all day long that will get self policed and the Blaze player would get a slap and you have to love Riley Brandt as he stepped up and did it. I’ve zero problem with it.

What I do have a problem with and this is where I hate modern pros a lot and modern league management is that the code also says you back up your actions and if a player comes looking you get your gloves off and defend yourself or you dive to the ice and turtle. Not flap your arms around like a duck, keep your gloves on and claim your an unwilling combatant. It’s embarrassing and I wish the refs refused to call it. If they won’t answer that’s when they are going to get cheap shot or you head hunt their star players so it’s not a good call to make game management wise anyway. You throw an interference hit on Ritchie then that instantly makes you willing in my eyes.

I know I’m a dinosaur but you only have to look at how entertained people are by having an old school type of team this season to know this cleaned up version being forced down people’s throats was the wrong way for the sport to go. Sometimes just let the players self police the game and pitch the application of the rule book at the right level.

The flip side being you gave a none call interpretation of a cross check to the back of the neck which is a far dirtier play than fronting someone up and popping them with a few. That guy could defend himself and chose not to. Cross checking an unaware guy from behind to the neck is a different ball game. It’s a messed up game which one gets the 5 min major.
 
H

hockeyhead29

Member
#38
#38
Mooney#16 said:
You used to hear it referred to as the code. Those that never played could never understand it but yesterday was a throw back example and I’m all for it. The code is Ritchie is so universally respected for his style of play and contribution to the league that he is regarded as untouchable. You do not deliver anything resembling a dodgy hit on Ritchie or you will get a slap. The hit thrown was interference and sent Ritchie to the boards awkwardly. You know all day long that will get self policed and the Blaze player would get a slap and you have to love Riley Brandt as he stepped up and did it. I’ve zero problem with it.

What I do have a problem with and this is where I hate modern pros a lot and modern league management is that the code also says you back up your actions and if a player comes looking you get your gloves off and defend yourself or you dive to the ice and turtle. Not flap your arms around like a duck, keep your gloves on and claim your an unwilling combatant. It’s embarrassing and I wish the refs refused to call it. If they won’t answer that’s when they are going to get cheap shot or you head hunt their star players so it’s not a good call to make game management wise anyway. You throw an interference hit on Ritchie then that instantly makes you willing in my eyes.

I know I’m a dinosaur but you only have to look at how entertained people are by having an old school type of team this season to know this cleaned up version being forced down people’s throats was the wrong way for the sport to go. Sometimes just let the players self police the game and pitch the application of the rule book at the right level.

The flip side being you gave a none call interpretation of a cross check to the back of the neck which is a far dirtier play than fronting someone up and popping them with a few. That guy could defend himself and chose not to. Cross checking an unaware guy from behind to the neck is a different ball game. It’s a messed up game which one gets the 5 min major.
Click to expand...
100% agree, especially when you look at the Constable hit on Oligny earlier in the game and Brandt taps him a couple of times to go but Constable doesn’t answer the bell. There comes a point you can’t allow hits like those to go unanswered as they escalate until someone gets hurt . I have no problem with Brandt saying enoughs enough and his team mates won’t either . Bigger issue is with the PK.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top