I'm not sure what a lensflare is, so I'm just going to assume it means a good-looking, well-muscled man who likes to eat steak. And so i thank you.
- jmatchett383

Absolutely. I didn't see a replay, but the Rosehill hit looked shoulder-to-shoulder.

Also, on the first PP where Read got high sticked, that is a prime example of why high sticking should be re-examined. Ranger basically chopped him in the face, basically a slash. But because read wasn't bleeding, it was only 2 minutes. I'm not here to berate the refs, as the Flyers got the benefit of a lot of calls (and non calls), but that was a much more dangerous play than a guy getting clipped and having a small gash.
- jmatchett383

Rosehill got roughing so I would guess that it was either because the puck was already behind the net by the time he hit hime, or the roughing was because of the scrum with Orr.

Reviewing that high stick wouldn't have done anything. It still would have only been 2. There would have to be a very complicated rule change

He's wrong.

Let's go to the video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3twF7OjMUOY

As Ray Ferraro states, Fraser commits the first penalty. Play continues and Rosehill hammers Fraser. At this point in time, instead of a Flyers PP, Rosehill evens up the penalties. Then Colton Orr decks Rosehill and the Flyers get a PP.

Clearly not "one play." If Rosehill never hits Fraser after the initial call on Fraser, they keep playing until the Leafs touch the puck and the Flyers get their PP.

But apply bias wherever you deem necessary, as I am apparently.
- bradleyc4

And if Fraser never commits the first penalty! Ifs, ands, or buts. It's amazing the "ifs" only apply to Rosehill. But there is no bias.


So by your logic, on the Flyers goal, the sequence was Streit passed to Lecavalier, then Lecavalier worked the puck behind the net, and passed to Schenn, who then shot the puck in the net. So because one happened before the other, it was not one play. I wonder how Streit and Lecavalier got the assists then, if it wasn't the same play. I'm also wondering how in the official game summary, all 3 penalties are listed at 3:35 on the official game time clock?

And I also recall that the Flyers got the PP? Maybe I imagined that.

And if Fraser never commits the first penalty! Ifs, ands, or buts. It's amazing the "ifs" only apply to Rosehill. But there is no bias.


So by your logic, on the Flyers goal, the sequence was Streit passed to Lecavalier, then Lecavalier worked the puck behind the net, and passed to Schenn, who then shot the puck in the net. So because one happened before the other, it was not one play. I wonder how Streit and Lecavalier got the assists then, if it wasn't the same play. I'm also wondering how in the official game summary, all 3 penalties are listed at 3:35 on the official game time clock?

And I also recall that the Flyers got the PP? Maybe I imagined that.
- MJL

Rosehill's hit shouldn't have been called a penalty, and Orr should have got five minutes for cross checking him in the neck.
- Feanor

Orr should have at least earned a double minor. And it can be argued that Rosehill's hit was a touch late. But it was a marginal call at that.

He played well last night I thought.
- MJL

Yeah, it was a poor attempt at sarcasm. I'm happy with what I saw. I can easily see him getting better and better as he gets more comfortable with the new system and teammates.

- bradleyc4

I applied the same sequencing on the goal, that you used to try and claim it wasn't all the same play? So what's the difference? Other then you just want to use a different criteria so you can unfairly criticize Rosehill on the play.

Yeah, it was a poor attempt at sarcasm. I'm happy with what I saw. I can easily see him getting better and better as he gets more comfortable with the new system and teammates.
- funmaster18

No, I got the sarcasm!

Orr should have at least earned a double minor. And it can be argued that Rosehill's hit was a touch late. But it was a marginal call at that.
- MJL

Not sure what angle the ref had but at first glance it looked like a typical retaliation shove, but replay sure told a different story. Definitely deserved at least 4 minutes.

I applied the same sequencing on the goal, that you used to try and claim it wasn't all the same play? So what's the difference? Other then you just want to use a different criteria so you can unfairly criticize Rosehill on the play.
- MJL

You're digging yourself an even deeper hole with your analogy.

There's not a strong enough beat to entice anyone to clap or stomp or Hey along. It's not a celebration song. It was disappointing.
- bodiva88

Oy! Oy! Oy!

Absolutely. I didn't see a replay, but the Rosehill hit looked shoulder-to-shoulder.

Also, on the first PP where Read got high sticked, that is a prime example of why high sticking should be re-examined. Ranger basically chopped him in the face, basically a slash. But because read wasn't bleeding, it was only 2 minutes. I'm not here to berate the refs, as the Flyers got the benefit of a lot of calls (and non calls), but that was a much more dangerous play than a guy getting clipped and having a small gash.
- jmatchett383

I think the initial contact was to the shoulder, and it glanced up into his mouth area.

No, I got the sarcasm!
- MJL

So it just wasn't funny?

But aside from a couple miscues, I thought Streit was exactly the kind of player the flyers were looking for.

Yeah, it was a poor attempt at sarcasm. I'm happy with what I saw. I can easily see him getting better and better as he gets more comfortable with the new system and teammates.
- funmaster18

He made everyone is my section happy by "SHOOT" ing the puck after Vinny fanned.
Consensus that Vinny was the best player on the team last night? yes/no?

You're digging yourself an even deeper hole with your analogy.
- bradleyc4

You can make that statement randomly, but there isn't much you can provide to back it up. I backed up my premise complete with the factual evidence of the official game summary.

And note the wording of "play continues" in the post you made on what Ferraro said.

So it just wasn't funny?

But aside from a couple miscues, I thought Streit was exactly the kind of player the flyers were looking for.
- funmaster18

As long as he can limit the defensive issues, he definitely showed the puck skills he has last night. I was encouraged by what I saw with both Streit and Lecavalier.

You can make that statement randomly, but there isn't much you can provide to back it up. I backed up my premise complete with the factual evidence of the official game summary.
- MJL

Congrats.

The point is, at the point that he "boards" Fraser, he has evened up the play. It is later changed back to the Flyers favor because Colton Orr is a moron. But, at the time that he committed his infraction, he had taken away a Flyer PP, and was only saved because Colton Orr is, unfortunately, Colton Orr.
- jmatchett383

Or, from our perspective, because fortunately he's Colton Orr. That's the way I saw the play, though.

He made everyone is my section happy by "SHOOT" ing the puck after Vinny fanned.
Consensus that Vinny was the best player on the team last night? yes/no?
- jmatchett383

Overall Vinny was very good. Very solid pick up for them.

Still want to see Schenn, Simmer, and Couturier take steps forward this season. I think a lot depends on that. Lots of hockey to come for them to do so.

Or, from our perspective, because fortunately he's Colton Orr. That's the way I saw the play, though.
- BulliesPhan87

Orr not?

You can make that statement randomly, but there isn't much you can provide to back it up. I backed up my premise complete with the factual evidence of the official game summary.

And note the wording of "play continues" in the post you made on what Ferraro said.
- MJL

OMG. Same play, differnet play, it doesnt matter. Frazer took a penality that could have hurt one of our players. Rosehill reacted as he is supposed to. Just like Schenn did with Lupul. It happened to fast to turn around to see if there was a penality called. He just acted. Lucky for us Orr reacted back. I have no issue with what Rosehill did, just as I have no issue to Schenn fighting. Though I would rather he didn't.

Overall Vinny was very good. Very solid pick up for them.

Still want to see Schenn, Simmer, and Couturier take steps forward this season. I think a lot depends on that. Lots of hockey to come for them to do so.
- funmaster18

I though B Schenn was one of the best Flyers forwards last night. Liked what I saw from him. Laviolette apparently did also. He gave him 19:54 of icetime. Which put him 3rd among Flyer forwards in ice time last night.

As long as he can limit the defensive issues, he definitely showed the puck skills he has last night. I was encouraged by what I saw with both Streit and Lecavalier.
- MJL

Same here, both looked good. The flyers have some figuring out to do for a balanced lineup, though. Starting with jake back on top. Have to believe he's not 100% or he would have been there. Lines 2 and 3 is where it gets interesting.

to the newest and greatest never ending "wash and repeat saga"

in the end they did not score on the powerplay.

OMG. Same play, differnet play, it doesnt matter. Frazer took a penality that could have hurt one of our players. Rosehill reacted as he is supposed to. Just like Schenn did with Lupul. It happened to fast to turn around to see if there was a penality called. He just acted. Lucky for us Orr reacted back. I have no issue with what Rosehill did, just as I have no issue to Schenn fighting. Though I would rather he didn't.
- youarewrong

You're right, it doesn't really matter. The end result was a Flyers PP. That's what happened. But some want to use "ifs" to criticize Rosehill on the play. That's what I object to. Especially when that criticism isn't objective.