- This topic has 11 replies, 7 voices, and was last updated 14 years, 6 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
What happened to the heated discussion that occurred last year after the end of a game, I liked that better. I have to sit at a computer all day don’t take away my entertainment.
I feel that one of the deciding factors in the Thunder – Stampede games was the removal of Stacey Rout’s beard. In the Gore game you could see that the beard was slowing him down to the point that he was struggling to keep up with the pace of the game.
But in Dunedin with out the cumbersome beard he was literally flying around the rink.
Is this some form of resistance training that he has hit upon?Also was the strobe filled warmup the Thunders downfall? Having failed to start light show early enough, the home game team decided to do their light show during the first two minutes of warmup, I can tell you its quite disconcerting as a goaltender when a player takes a shot just before a strobe light goes out, and when it comes back the puck is in your face.
Perhaps we can blame the storyteller like narration of the game, for lulling the players into a slumber, don’t get me wrong it was informative, but it lacked a certain Janice Sekar. There was no emotion in it, they should bring back that guy that said the finnish players name like it was a chainsaw……
Some people might think that you’re not taking it seriously Aaron.
I thought Spiers was a significant difference maker. Couple of very accurate wrist shots that beat Parry where he had no right to score.
To paraphrase the joker “Why [does everthing have to be] so serious?”
I thought if I hypothesised some ridiculous excuse for a loss, the real analysts amongst us would come out of the woodwork and give some real reasons.
I though one of the major differences was the contrasting D-zones. As my Granddad (who has never watched a game of ice hockey before) said whenever you were shooting on their goalie he had a whole bunch of his team mates helping him out, whereas the Thunder goalie was left by himself making it hard.
Also Thunder showed signs of panic a lot getting rid of the puck more quickly then required.
Also I am not sure why the officials deemed it necessary to tackle the thunder players so often? Mike Ceelan took out our Dman in the first period, and Paul Scott got Damo quite good in the 3rd. Perhaps I haven’t read my rulebook lately but I don’t think that’s how you officiate a game.
Also most of the crowd I have talked to asked me if their will be a fight every game, because they loved it….I myself felt it was poorly timed on Thunders behalf, as we were making good progress when it happened, and that 5 mins of 3-3 didn’t really help us.
Well it would have been ok had it been called right. nevermind, just tell them thathere is a high possibility of it happening every game
yeah i don’t know how many other teams have practised their 3 on 3’s. I had assumed up until now that it was generally impossible on coincidentals in regulation.
I thought on the Saturday we actually had less penalty minutes? Although I could be mistaken…..
It seemed like in the 2nd period Stampede really upped the niggle, and the ref’s caught it, but the niggle worked at they got under some of the Thunder players skinFrom my position behind the net both games I would say i think the Stampede had more time on the puck through the netural zone in setting up for a shot. The thunder appeared to have a rush attack system. A couple of times the puck left the thunders attack zone to easily with a missed puck handel at the blue line. This may of been big game nerves for some of the thunder members. However I think the thunder never scored when attacking the warmroom end. ie a quiet 2nd period both games.They were in it both games at the end of the first period.
There was alot of niggle which I guess comes with hockey, but as long as there can be niggle and it does not effect ones head and decision making thats fine. but when it boils over into outbursts and ice grudges then the core reason for playing may come in second untill that niggle debt is paid in the heads of players.I will be there come this weekend to support the boys again. Go Thunder!!!!
"Azzy77":6czg6e0k wrote:Also I am not sure why the officials deemed it necessary to tackle the thunder players so often? Mike Ceelan took out our Dman in the first period, and Paul Scott got Damo quite good in the 3rd. Perhaps I haven’t read my rulebook lately but I don’t think that’s how you officiate a game.
[/quote:6czg6e0k]I think I evened that up when I got in the way of one of the Stampede players (Rout?) when he was trying to back away from the blue line to cover Paris and it ended up being a 2 on 1 for Thunder.
Thunder looked better in the 3 on 3 than Stampede. I’m not sure if Stampede scored, but Thunder certainly did during that five minutes. You’ll probably never get to play 3 on 3 again however.
to be fair to mr cleelan, i dont think he could see what was happening on the ice, he was just standing round chilling and people would crash into him
The best thing that happened to the Thunder was the 3 on 3 you guys scored 2 goals and the neutral zone PK forecheck was very effective for the break in’s
If Thunder had of kept playing like in the first period getting deep and forechecking hard might have been better outcome.
Defense wise very weak in the zone hopefuly the new D takes control of this for the Thunder
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.