February 10, 2009

Tampa Bay Game 54: vs Atlanta

The Tampa Bay Lightning lost to the Atlanta Thrashers 3-1.

Okay, usually I think that the reviewed goals are pretty on - as strictly interpreted according to the rules. And, in this case, I can see why they called Stamkos's penalty shot a no-goal. They ruling on the ice was that it didn't go in. In the video, there's no absolutely conclusive evidence that the puck actually went over the line. It's totally inferred - the puck went into the goalie's glove, and the glove went over the goal line, but you can't tell if the puck dropped out of the glove and onto the ice before the glove crossed the line. It's so not right, but what can you do?

However, the officials don't call anything else so strictly, so why do they do that with the penalty shots? Maybe because it's the officials in Toronto that make the call and not the guys on the ice? Either way, it's terribly inconsistent. And I think that's what annoys people the most.

The non-goal earlier by Roberts, by the way, was the correct call. He did interfere with the goalie, and he did have some opportunity to get out of the way. And the Thrasher player did not push him into the Atlanta goalie.

The Lightning's biggest problem was passing. They were sloppy about it, and their passes kept getting picked off. They were also making long passes through the neutral zone, which didn't help matters, either. And it wasn't just the guys passing, but the guys receiving - they weren't prepared for the puck and that caused problems for them breaking into the offensive zone. The whole passing thing wasn't all that great, no matter how you slice it. And that's mostly what did them in, I think.

Their energy was good. Sometimes I think they have problems pacing themselves in that regard. And they did a great job on shooting more often and consistently throughout the game.

But then, face offs weren't the best. And they couldn't convert on the power play, despite having five tries at it - which was alright since neither could Atlanta. Unfortunately, they did manage a shorthanded goal.

You know, it's as if, when they do one thing particularly well, another aspect of the game has to suffer for that. I'm not sure why that is. Although, I suppose it's only natural to do that, now that I'm thinking about it.

There was the first of a two part feature on Lecavalier and racing on during the pregame, and again during the second period. The second part of the feature will be shown before and during the next game.

I had two thoughts on this. One, the only racing that goes on in the Seattle area - where I grew up - are the hydroplanes races on Lake Washington during Seafair. Vancouver has their grand prix, but not a lot of people in the Seattle area knows that goes on. It's like a whole 'nother country up there or something. So we stick with the fiberglass boats that have jet engines strapped to them. Or used to use jet engines. I'm not sure anymore. But the wipeouts are pretty impressive, I have to say, particularly when you consider that they're going 150+ mph on occasionally choppy water.

And two, good for him that he's fulfilling a lifeling dream. You know, he's in a position would he should be doing things like that. So take advantage of it while you can, you know?

No comments:

Post a Comment