WBL/Cent.

formerlybackofnet · Post by **formerlybackofnet** » Tue Dec 30, 2008 11:08 am

MedleyWR wrote:
StateofHockeyFan wrote:WBL had some UGLY goals, they were either garbage goals or fluke goals, not to be picky. pitlick was definitely the best player on the ice and had some very nice looking goals.
Hmmm...
UGLY goals usually means UGLY goaltending. The truth is that WBL dominated this game until the third period. The only UGLY thing about the game was the UGLY cheap-shot, cross checking-from-behind penalty from Centennial that injured the WBL defender and left WBL short on defense. That allowed Centennial to make a come-back in the third. It should have been a 5 minute major with a game DQ.

You're right about that!

mnhcky65 · Post by **mnhcky65** » Tue Dec 30, 2008 11:26 am

formerlybackofnet wrote:
MedleyWR wrote:
StateofHockeyFan wrote:WBL had some UGLY goals, they were either garbage goals or fluke goals, not to be picky. pitlick was definitely the best player on the ice and had some very nice looking goals.
Hmmm...
UGLY goals usually means UGLY goaltending. The truth is that WBL dominated this game until the third period. The only UGLY thing about the game was the UGLY cheap-shot, cross checking-from-behind penalty from Centennial that injured the WBL defender and left WBL short on defense. That allowed Centennial to make a come-back in the third. It should have been a 5 minute major with a game DQ.
You're right about that!

agreed... hopefully they can pull through tomorrow.

carpenterguy · Post by **carpenterguy** » Tue Dec 30, 2008 11:27 am

Centennial controlled the first 10 minutes of the game as WBL only had 1 shot and it went in.

WBL capitalized on their opportunities and got the win. WBL scored a flurry of goals in the second that sealed the deal. The third period was all Centennial.

I believe Centennial would beat them 8 out of 10 times but it wasn't to be yesterday.

mnhcky65 · Post by **mnhcky65** » Tue Dec 30, 2008 11:41 am

carpenterguy wrote:Centennial controlled the first 10 minutes of the game as WBL only had 1 shot and it went in.

WBL capitalized on their opportunities and got the win. WBL scored a flurry of goals in the second that sealed the deal. The third period was all Centennial.

I believe Centennial would beat them 8 out of 10 times but it wasn't to be yesterday.

it would have been a much closer game if Centennial goaltending was on his game and WB defense was on their game too

hockeyxfan01 · Post by **hockeyxfan01** » Tue Dec 30, 2008 11:58 am

MedleyWR wrote:
StateofHockeyFan wrote:WBL had some UGLY goals, they were either garbage goals or fluke goals, not to be picky. pitlick was definitely the best player on the ice and had some very nice looking goals.
Hmmm...
UGLY goals usually means UGLY goaltending. The truth is that WBL dominated this game until the third period. The only UGLY thing about the game was the UGLY cheap-shot, cross checking-from-behind penalty from Centennial that injured the WBL defender and left WBL short on defense. That allowed Centennial to make a come-back in the third. It should have been a 5 minute major with a game DQ.

I agree, I was surprised the refs didn't call a five minute major.

TheNightman · Post by **TheNightman** » Tue Dec 30, 2008 12:03 pm

mnhcky65 wrote:
carpenterguy wrote:Centennial controlled the first 10 minutes of the game as WBL only had 1 shot and it went in.

WBL capitalized on their opportunities and got the win. WBL scored a flurry of goals in the second that sealed the deal. The third period was all Centennial.

I believe Centennial would beat them 8 out of 10 times but it wasn't to be yesterday.
it would have been a much closer game if Centennial goaltending was on his game and WB defense was on their game too

It seems to me that it would be tough to be much closer than a 1 goal game

mnhcky65 · Post by **mnhcky65** » Tue Dec 30, 2008 12:08 pm

TheNightman wrote:
mnhcky65 wrote:
carpenterguy wrote:Centennial controlled the first 10 minutes of the game as WBL only had 1 shot and it went in.

WBL capitalized on their opportunities and got the win. WBL scored a flurry of goals in the second that sealed the deal. The third period was all Centennial.

I believe Centennial would beat them 8 out of 10 times but it wasn't to be yesterday.
it would have been a much closer game if Centennial goaltending was on his game and WB defense was on their game too
It seems to me that it would be tough to be much closer than a 1 goal game

im not talking scorewise... more of puck and zone dominance

blanco oso · Post by **blanco oso** » Tue Dec 30, 2008 12:56 pm

yah i hope the kid the cheap shotted gjerde is reading this whole thread because no one, not even centennial fans/parents are proud of,what i think is one of the cheapest shots ive ever seen. hittin and being physical is all apart of the game, but when you pull somethin like that and injure someone on purpose? thats just un-classy and cheap.

mnhcky65 · Post by **mnhcky65** » Tue Dec 30, 2008 3:11 pm

blanco oso wrote:yah i hope the kid the cheap shotted gjerde is reading this whole thread because no one, not even centennial fans/parents are proud of,what i think is one of the cheapest shots ive ever seen. hittin and being physical is all apart of the game, but when you pull somethin like that and injure someone on purpose? thats just un-classy and cheap.

I beleive Gjerde suffered a concussion and is out for todays game.

tuffpucker · Post by **tuffpucker** » Tue Dec 30, 2008 4:18 pm

[quote="mnhcky65"][quote="blanco oso"]yah i hope the kid the cheap shotted gjerde is reading this whole thread because no one, not even centennial fans/parents are proud of,what i think is one of the cheapest shots ive ever seen. hittin and being physical is all apart of the game, but when you pull somethin like that and injure someone on purpose? thats just un-classy and cheap.[/quote]

I beleive Gjerde suffered a concussion and is out for todays game.[/quote]

From what I seen it was not a cheap shot. The WB player turned to avoid being hit which actually caused the collision.

MedleyWR · Post by **MedleyWR** » Tue Dec 30, 2008 4:41 pm

tuffpucker wrote:
mnhcky65 wrote:
blanco oso wrote:yah i hope the kid the cheap shotted gjerde is reading this whole thread because no one, not even centennial fans/parents are proud of,what i think is one of the cheapest shots ive ever seen. hittin and being physical is all apart of the game, but when you pull somethin like that and injure someone on purpose? thats just un-classy and cheap.
I beleive Gjerde suffered a concussion and is out for todays game.
From what I seen it was not a cheap shot. The WB player turned to avoid being hit which actually caused the collision.

Well then you didn't "seen" it very well. The WBL player was facing the boards, playing the puck. I was just a few feet away on the glass and saw it very clearly. He didn't turn away from the hit - since his back was turned, he probably never saw it coming. And how could the WBL player turning cause the collision? The Centennial player took a run at him. It was a combination of charging, cross checking, checking from behind and boarding and since it resulted in an injury, should have rightly been called a 5 minute major with a game DQ. Hockey can be a rough game, but there is no way to justify or excuse that kind of blatant cheap shot.