Flyers response to the 1-3-1 against Bolts

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from RawrBear. Show RawrBear's posts

    Flyers response to the 1-3-1 against Bolts

    Anyone else watching this? Hilarious, and completely understandable and acceptable. Although it is unneccessary as it's more than possible to counter.
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from shuperman. Show shuperman's posts

    Re: Flyers response to the 1-3-1 against Bolts

    I am and its perfect.  Wonder how the fans dishing out big money for that gaebage feel.  I hate the trap. 
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from SanDogBrewin. Show SanDogBrewin's posts

    Re: Flyers response to the 1-3-1 against Bolts

    http://thecoachessite.com/guy-bouchers-1-3-1-trending-in-hockey-circles/

    Laviolette (sp?) screaming at the refs that this is not against the rules as long as the puck is in motion and the Flyers bench yelling "chicken" to the Bolts forwards for not for-checking, pretty funny is right. I don't think Lighning fans like it when they can't clang their cowbells...
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from Bruinfaninnewjersey. Show Bruinfaninnewjersey's posts

    Re: Flyers response to the 1-3-1 against Bolts

    Flipping back and forth between this and the Rangers...

    One team was playing good defense and the other was playing with themselves. You decide which.
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from 49-North. Show 49-North's posts

    Re: Flyers response to the 1-3-1 against Bolts

    My guess is that if this happens again, the league will re-interpret the Delay of Game call to include "deliberate play designed to avoid advancing the puck".

    Charging into the offensive zone when you don't have the puck (forechecking) is not a required element of the game.  Trying to move into the offensive zone when you do have the puck is.
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from dezaruchi. Show dezaruchi's posts

    Re: Flyers response to the 1-3-1 against Bolts

    In Response to Re: Flyers response to the 1-3-1 against Bolts:
    [QUOTE]My guess is that if this happens again, the league will re-interpret the Delay of Game call to include "deliberate play designed to avoid advancing the puck". Charging into the offensive zone when you don't have the puck (forechecking) is not a required element of the game.  Trying to move into the offensive zone when you do have the puck is.
    Posted by 49-North[/QUOTE]
    As long as you're winning it isn't.
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from bogie6. Show bogie6's posts

    Re: Flyers response to the 1-3-1 against Bolts

    Missed it, what happened?
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from Chowdahkid-. Show Chowdahkid-'s posts

    Re: Flyers response to the 1-3-1 against Bolts

    In Response to Re: Flyers response to the 1-3-1 against Bolts:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Flyers response to the 1-3-1 against Bolts : As long as you're winning it isn't.
    Posted by dezaruchi[/QUOTE]

    .......which wasn't the case when this was all happening. A matchup of two good teams ruined by coaching.
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from DrCC. Show DrCC's posts

    Re: Flyers response to the 1-3-1 against Bolts

    In Response to Re: Flyers response to the 1-3-1 against Bolts:
    [QUOTE]Missed it, what happened?
    Posted by bogie6[/QUOTE]
    http://video.nhl.com/videocenter/console?catid=35&id=133956
    Really bizarre to see everyone just standing around.
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from SanDogBrewin. Show SanDogBrewin's posts

    Re: Flyers response to the 1-3-1 against Bolts

    In Response to Re: Flyers response to the 1-3-1 against Bolts:[QUOTE]Charging into the offensive zone when you don't have the puck (forechecking) is not a required element of the game.  Trying to move into the offensive zone when you do have the puck is.Posted by 49-North[/QUOTE]

    Blake Wheeler should read this over and over...
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from BsLegion. Show BsLegion's posts

    Re: Flyers response to the 1-3-1 against Bolts

    In Response to Re: Flyers response to the 1-3-1 against Bolts:
    [QUOTE]I am and its perfect.  Wonder how the fans dishing out big money for that gaebage feel.  I hate the trap. 
    Posted by shuperman[/QUOTE]

    Loved it and good for Laviolette for taking a stance on anti-hockey.
    I don't see how the league can punish a team if they keep moving the puck in their own defensive zone . It doesn't violate rule 72.
    Either way you look at it you cannot blame one team or the other .

     
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from bim09. Show bim09's posts

    Re: Flyers response to the 1-3-1 against Bolts

    In Response to Re: Flyers response to the 1-3-1 against Bolts:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Flyers response to the 1-3-1 against Bolts : Loved it and good for Laviolette for taking a stance on anti-hockey. I don't see how the league can punish a team if they keep moving the puck in their own defensive zone . It doesn't violate rule 72. Either way you look at it you cannot blame one team or the other .  
    Posted by BsLegion[/QUOTE]

    I think you can.  This is not basketball.
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from OatesCam. Show OatesCam's posts

    Re: Flyers response to the 1-3-1 against Bolts

    Julien had no problem adapting to the 1-3-1, and exploiting it, which forced Boucher to change plans.
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from bluefox70. Show bluefox70's posts

    Re: Flyers response to the 1-3-1 against Bolts

    In Response to Re: Flyers response to the 1-3-1 against Bolts:
    [QUOTE]Julien had no problem adapting to the 1-3-1, and exploiting it, which forced Boucher to change plans.
    Posted by OatesCam[/QUOTE]

    Not a true statement!!  He had a ton of problems and the Bruins only beat the 1-3-1 cleanly once and that was for the only goal in game 7.  All other goals were off unusual "bounces" somewhere on the ice or a bad change.
     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from bogie6. Show bogie6's posts

    Re: Flyers response to the 1-3-1 against Bolts

    Just read the TSN discourse on what happened. Sure confused the refs. As Oatescam stated, Claude found a way to circumvent, so it's apparent our defense first coach is well schooled in all defensive structures [ I cannot beleive that I am complementing Claude so frequently] . Must be the water, or even that Claude has more players he trusts and beleives in. He seems to be a different and more involved coach this year.
     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from seobrien. Show seobrien's posts

    Re: Flyers response to the 1-3-1 against Bolts

    I liked the point Laviolette was making. A trap by any other name. Never thought I'd be agreeing with Cementhead Milbury.
     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from Orrthebest. Show Orrthebest's posts

    Re: Flyers response to the 1-3-1 against Bolts

    All the Flyers did was say to Tampa that they were not good enough to beat their defensive system.  If I was a Tampa fan or player I would be very happy that this happened.  If I was a Philli fan I would be embarassed that my team would not even try.
     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from Fletcher1. Show Fletcher1's posts

    Re: Flyers response to the 1-3-1 against Bolts

    I agree that it is kind of funny to put the microscope on Tampa, especially in their own rink.  I wouldn't be thrilled if I bought tickets and this went on for a long time.  But I like the message that was sent.

    You want to play the boring trap??  Let's see how your fans like it if we up the ante.
     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from BruinsIn4. Show BruinsIn4's posts

    Re: Flyers response to the 1-3-1 against Bolts

    In Response to Re: Flyers response to the 1-3-1 against Bolts:
    [QUOTE]All the Flyers did was say to Tampa that they were not good enough to beat their defensive system.  If I was a Tampa fan or player I would be very happy that this happened.  If I was a Philli fan I would be embarassed that my team would not even try.
    Posted by Orrthebest[/QUOTE]

    All the Bolts did was to say to Philly that they were so afraid of the Flyers offence that they would not engage in actualy hockey.  I hate both teams, but the Lightning's play last night sickened me.  In the soccer world it's called "anti-soccer".
     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from dezaruchi. Show dezaruchi's posts

    Re: Flyers response to the 1-3-1 against Bolts

    In Response to Re: Flyers response to the 1-3-1 against Bolts:
    [QUOTE]All the Flyers did was say to Tampa that they were not good enough to beat their defensive system.  If I was a Tampa fan or player I would be very happy that this happened.  If I was a Philli fan I would be embarassed that my team would not even try.
    Posted by Orrthebest[/QUOTE]
    Why should Philly feel compelled to play T-Bay's game by essentially falling into the trap? Couldn't you make the same argument about T-Bay's refusal to four check? I mean their "four checker" was basically refusing to cross the blue line. If I was a Lightning fan, I might not be embarrassed, but I'd certainly be bored.  

    BTW, this post took a long while to get OK'd by the moderators. Who knew it was profane to write the word four in any other way. Ridiculous.
     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from OatesCam. Show OatesCam's posts

    Re: Flyers response to the 1-3-1 against Bolts

    Guess you watched a different series than I did.  In the one I saw, the Bruins D held the puck and exploited the lack of pressure they were getting. They moved the puck back and forth until the '1' forward tired and an opening occurred. From game 4 on Boucher had stopped using the system because it was being exploited. Then his eyes went googly and he flipped out.  But that was the version I watched.  Maybe it was different  in other versions.

    In Response to Re: Flyers response to the 1-3-1 against Bolts:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Flyers response to the 1-3-1 against Bolts : Not a true statement!!  He had a ton of problems and the Bruins only beat the 1-3-1 cleanly once and that was for the only goal in game 7.  All other goals were off unusual "bounces" somewhere on the ice or a bad change.
    Posted by bluefox70[/QUOTE]
     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from Fletcher1. Show Fletcher1's posts

    Re: Flyers response to the 1-3-1 against Bolts

    In Response to Re: Flyers response to the 1-3-1 against Bolts:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Flyers response to the 1-3-1 against Bolts : Why should Philly feel compelled to play T-Bay's game by essentially falling into the trap? Couldn't you make the same argument about T-Bay's refusal to four check? I mean their "four checker" was basically refusing to cross the blue line. If I was a Lightning fan, I might not be embarrassed, but I'd certainly be bored.   BTW, this post took a long while to get OK'd by the moderators. Who knew it was profane to write the word four in any other way. Ridiculous.
    Posted by dezaruchi[/QUOTE]

    Totally ridiculous.  When did they stop telling you which word was the problem?

    It took me 15 minutes the other day to figure out that I couldn't write 'four check' correctly.

    If that word is deemed offensive, you've got to wonder if Dimitri Khristich is the moderator...
     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from dezaruchi. Show dezaruchi's posts

    Re: Flyers response to the 1-3-1 against Bolts

    In Response to Re: Flyers response to the 1-3-1 against Bolts:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Flyers response to the 1-3-1 against Bolts : Totally ridiculous.  When did they stop telling you which word was the problem? It took me 15 minutes the other day to figure out that I couldn't write 'four check' correctly. If that word is deemed offensive, you've got to wonder if Dimitri Khristich is the moderator...
    Posted by Fletcher1[/QUOTE]
    Awesome! You're right though. Man, I was getting frustrated trying to figure out what was so offensive in the post.
     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from BsLegion. Show BsLegion's posts

    Re: Flyers response to the 1-3-1 against Bolts

    fore
     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from BsLegion. Show BsLegion's posts

    Re: Flyers response to the 1-3-1 against Bolts

    check
     

Share