If it was so (frank)ing "clear" and over the line then why the (frank) didn't video review turn the call on the ice over?
- mjones242

you tell me why, i was flabbergasted when the ref said no goal after video review. must be some real idiots or homers reviewing these goals.

Damn. Panthers beat the sharks
- Ravenz93

If Bob starts playing like he's capable of playing, Panthers are going to be tough to hold off.

Because they made a mistake. That's the whole point. Leafs fans complained that they made mistakes one way but can't acknowledge that they made mistakes both ways.
- JohnFergusonJr

The refs on the ice made a mistake. The video review team made a mistake. Many other people still can't conclusively or "clearly" see the puck in the net.

The only thing conclusive or clear that happened in last night's game was the Sabres pounding the Leafs.

you tell me why, i was flabbergasted when the ref said no goal after video review. must be some real idiots or homers reviewing these goals.
- ghetto puck

Because they made a mistake. That's the whole point. Leafs fans complained that they made mistakes one way but can't acknowledge that they made mistakes both ways.
- JohnFergusonJr

I can't believe I ever let myself be part of this idiotic discussion.😕

If Bob starts playing like he's capable of playing, Panthers are going to be tough to hold off.
- JohnFergusonJr

It would certainly be nice for my pool as his underachieving butt is my #1 starter.

Having said that, it's a nightmare scenario for the Leafs' playoff potential if he does catch fire.

I can't believe I ever let myself be part of this idiotic discussion.😕
- fifty__missions

Yes you can.

The refs on the ice made a mistake. The video review team made a mistake. Many other people still can't conclusively or "clearly" see the puck in the net.

The only thing conclusive or clear that happened in last night's game was the Sabres pounding the Leafs.
- mjones242

Because they choose not to. It's pretty clear.

Your 2nd point is the real good point though. The Leafs lost because they didn't play well enough or work hard enough, not because of the referees.

you tell me why, i was flabbergasted when the ref said no goal after video review. must be some real idiots or homers reviewing these goals.
- ghetto puck

Because you cant see the line, or white ice between it and the puck. Stupid.

This really isn't (frank)ing hard.

Because you cant see the line, or white ice between it and the puck. Stupid.

This really isn't (frank)ing hard.
- joel878

Where is the line and the white ice when the puck was in Allen's glove?

Can't answer that one because you know the truth.

Where is the line and the white ice when the puck was in Allen's glove?

Can't answer that one because you know the truth.
- JohnFergusonJr

You've found one example you think proves your point VS the hundreds that support the rule?

I literally don't have time for your bullpoop, you (frank)ing pissant. Like someone said, stop thinking you wrote the rulebook and actually look up the rule.

You've found one example you think proves your point VS the hundreds that support the rule?

I literally don't have time for your bullpoop, you (frank)ing pissant. Like someone said, stop thinking you wrote the rulebook and actually look up the rule.
- joel878

So many insults, so little evidence.

So many insults, so little evidence.
- JohnFergusonJr

I actually don't think you can shelve your napoleon complex long enough to understand what the word evidence means.

Here's a hint. 'because I said so' isn't evidence. GTFO and read the rule.

Because they choose not to. It's pretty clear.

Your 2nd point is the real good point though. The Leafs lost because they didn't play well enough or work hard enough, not because of the referees.
- JohnFergusonJr

In your opinion, sure.

Something else that is clear (at least, to me!):

Dubas needs to make a bold move before the TDL to add a gritty Top 4 d-man (let's be honest, we're not getting a stud top pairing) and a veteran power forward.

Per the latter need, I'm going to keep saying it: Simmonds is a near perfect fit. A Messier Leadership Award under his belt, gritty, and a local boy.

In your opinion, sure.

Something else that is clear (at least, to me!):

Dubas needs to make a bold move before the TDL to add a gritty Top 4 d-man (let's be honest, we're not getting a stud top pairing) and a veteran power forward.

Per the latter need, I'm going to keep saying it: Simmonds is a near perfect fit. A Messier Leadership Award under his belt, gritty, and a local boy.
- mjones242

It's pretty clear if you're unbiased.

The "bold" move Dubas needs to make is to realize he was wrong with Barrie and Kerfoot and needs to start recovering his assets. He needs to take one step backward so that he can take two forward.

Simmonds is finished. He's not the answer. They can bring in cheaper crash and bang players who are younger too.

It's pretty clear if you're unbiased.

The "bold" move Dubas needs to make is to realize he was wrong with Barrie and Kerfoot and needs to start recovering his assets. He needs to take one step backward so that he can take two forward.

Simmonds is finished. He's not the answer. They can bring in cheaper crash and bang players who are younger too.
- JohnFergusonJr

Holy shiite you're exhausting. Do you ever stop arguing and just stfu??

Holy shiite you're exhausting. Do you ever stop arguing and just stfu??
- fifty__missions

No he doesn’t. The inferiority complex is strong in that one.

Holy shiite you're exhausting. Do you ever stop arguing and just stfu??
- fifty__missions

Consider it dropped.

It's pretty clear if you're unbiased.

The "bold" move Dubas needs to make is to realize he was wrong with Barrie and Kerfoot and needs to start recovering his assets. He needs to take one step backward so that he can take two forward.

Simmonds is finished. He's not the answer. They can bring in cheaper crash and bang players who are younger too.
- JohnFergusonJr

You are not qualified to be an arbiter of bias.

As per Simmonds, he's one year removed from his Messier award and he's still throwing his body around and can be effective on our 3rd or 4th lines. I never said he's "the answer" but he would be another effective piece on and off the ice. He presents tools this team currently lacks outside of Kyle Clifford: size and fearlessness.

If you can present a more affordable gritty, power forward type I'm willing to listen. I personally think this team needs more than just an on-ice contributor. Sure they can bring in "crash and bang players" who are younger - but this team needs a veteran presence with experience. Plus, he's a rental so it shouldn't cost too much to acquire his services.

Kerfoot has been just fine. Versatile and cheap.

Barrie would be better if we had a stud defender that could adequately cover his sometimes questionable roaming tactics. I won't be sad to see him go if he brings in assets that can help us pick up a Muzzin+ type on the right side.

You are not qualified to be an arbiter of bias.

As per Simmonds, he's one year removed from his Messier award and he's still throwing his body around and can be effective on our 3rd or 4th lines. I never said he's "the answer" but he would be another effective piece on and off the ice. He presents tools this team currently lacks outside of Kyle Clifford: size and fearlessness.

If you can present a more affordable gritty, power forward type I'm willing to listen. I personally think this team needs more than just an on-ice contributor. Sure they can bring in "crash and bang players" who are younger - but this team needs a veteran presence with experience. Plus, he's a rental so it shouldn't cost too much to acquire his services.

Kerfoot has been just fine. Versatile and cheap.

Barrie would be better if we had a stud defender that could adequately cover his sometimes questionable roaming tactics. I won't be sad to see him go if he brings in assets that can help us pick up a Muzzin+ type on the right side.
- mjones242

Simmonds is not what he use to be. A Messier Award isn't worth much, sorry.

Marcus Foligno at 50% retained. Sam Bennett. Both younger, more gas in the tank and cheaper.

Kerfoot is not cheap or versatile. He's a passenger on Tavares' line with 8 goals for 3+ AAV. He's barely half the player Kadri was at 3/4 the price.

Barrie is not what the Leafs need. If they're going to spend assets to get a stud defender, they need that guy to be beside Rielly.

If people want to argue with truth and reality, that's their business. Just showing the obvious facts for those that care about objectivity.
- JohnFergusonJr

Calm down Eric.

Simmonds is not what he use to be. A Messier Award isn't worth much, sorry.

Marcus Foligno at 50% retained. Sam Bennett. Both younger, more gas in the tank and cheaper.

Kerfoot is not cheap or versatile. He's a passenger on Tavares' line with 8 goals for 3+ AAV. He's barely half the player Kadri was at 3/4 the price.

Barrie is not what the Leafs need. If they're going to spend assets to get a stud defender, they need that guy to be beside Rielly.
- JohnFergusonJr

Kadri has 25 5v5 points (51 games).

Kerfoot has 21 5v5 points (55 games).


¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Toffoli traded to Vancouver.

Kadri has 25 5v5 points.

Kerfoot has 21 5v5 points.


¯\_(ツ)_/¯
- Steven_Seagull

19 goals. Grittier player. More skilled. Is an actual center who can actually win face-offs. Plays two-way hockey. If he played with Tavares, he'd sure as (frank) have a lot more than 8 goals.

19 goals. Grittier player. More skilled. Plays two-way hockey. If he played with Tavares, he'd sure as (frank) have a lot more than 8 goals.
- JohnFergusonJr

Whatever man. Kerfoot has been fine.