Conquer Club

Okay so Finland-Sweden it is then. Where are you nattydread? I don't care! F*ck you natty! F*ck Finland, Go Sweden!!

Here I was thinking Sweden's performance against Slovenia was shaky, and then I see how Canada has 1-1 after 2,5 periods against Latvia. Boy are they going to have trouble with USA if they get through Latvia at all.

Gudlevskis played out of his fucking mind for Latvia.

US looked really good again. Should be a good semi.

USA over Canada
Finland over Sweden

USA over Finland
Sweden over (a now disinterested) Canada

Bollocks.

Also, Tavares is done for the tournament.

Bollocks.

Happy the US/Canada game is at 12 on Friday but the gold medal game will be at 7:30 on Sunday. UGHHH

I'll be up.

Bollocks.

Serbia wrote:I'll be up.

Bollocks.

your mom will be up


















































on my dick

What else is new?
Also, were you in Cleveland at a Dropkick Murphy's concert last night? Because there was this very short fellow who looked just like you, and he couldn't stop slapping his buddy on the shoulder.

Bollocks.

Serbia wrote:What else is new?
Also, were you in Cleveland at a Dropkick Murphy's concert last night? Because there was this very short fellow who looked just like you, and he couldn't stop slapping his buddy on the shoulder.

Bollocks.

Why do you do all these cool things without me? I want to be a rad dude too.

DoomYoshi wrote:

Serbia wrote:What else is new?
Also, were you in Cleveland at a Dropkick Murphy's concert last night? Because there was this very short fellow who looked just like you, and he couldn't stop slapping his buddy on the shoulder.

Bollocks.

Why do you do all these cool things without me? I want to be a rad dude too.

You never asked.

Bollocks.

I wasn't surprised by Finland beating Russia. Nor was I surprised by the trouble Canada had with Latvia, given how the Latvians played against the Swedes.

Finland will beat Sweden. The Swedes have had the 4 easiest games of the final 4, with wins over Switzerland, Latvia, Slovenia and the under-performing Czechs. Finland put up an OT loss to Canada that could have gone the other way, and put in a solid win over Russia. The Fin's style has proven effective in this tournament - it's the same style that the Swiss and Latvians put to good use, just with more talent backing it.

The Americans are playing very well, and have actually been challenged. Canada hasn't lost yet, but even in their two closest games (Finland and Latvia), their defence and goaltending were never tested. Price hasn't faced many shots, and the Canadian defencemen haven't had to do much other than score.

I predict that the winner of the Canada-USA game will win the gold, regardless of the winner of the Finland-Sweden game.

Serbia wrote:USA over Canada
Finland over Sweden

USA over Finland
Sweden over (a now disinterested) Canada

Bollocks.

BLASPHEMY!!!!!

notyou2 wrote:

Serbia wrote:USA over Canada
Finland over Sweden

USA over Finland
Sweden over (a now disinterested) Canada

Bollocks.

BLASPHEMY!!!!!

+1 a lot of Americans are gonna be pissed off on Friday

Army of GOD wrote:Happy the US/Canada game is at 12 on Friday but the gold medal game will be at 7:30 on Sunday. UGHHH

I'm hoping I need to be up for 5:30am (Mountain Time) on Sunday.

oVo wrote:

Women Hockey final

Canada beats USA with a 5 on 3 goal in OT

It was 4 on 3. There was still a Canadian in the box.

Can someone explain to me why they added an extra player when the Americans got the second penalty? Should it not have been like normal when a team takes a penalty with only 3 players on the ice - the second penalty's time doesn't start until the first one runs out (and the first player is not allowed back on the ice when that penalty ends)?

denominator wrote:

oVo wrote:

Women Hockey final

Canada beats USA with a 5 on 3 goal in OT

It was 4 on 3. There was still a Canadian in the box.

Can someone explain to me why they added an extra player when the Americans got the second penalty? Should it not have been like normal when a team takes a penalty with only 3 players on the ice - the second penalty's time doesn't start until the first one runs out (and the first player is not allowed back on the ice when that penalty ends)?

They added a second player because you can only have at minimum 3 players on the ice. So since the overtime format is 4 on 4 and the USA had two penalties and Canada had one, you can't play 3 on 2. They were playing 3 on 3 due to both teams having one penalty each, so when the USA got another one they had to add a player to each team to make it 4 on 3.

In regards to your point about starting the second penalty when the first one runs out, it kind of defeats the benefit of being up two players and negates the difficulties of being short two players.

keiths31 wrote:

denominator wrote:

oVo wrote:

Women Hockey final

Canada beats USA with a 5 on 3 goal in OT

It was 4 on 3. There was still a Canadian in the box.

Can someone explain to me why they added an extra player when the Americans got the second penalty? Should it not have been like normal when a team takes a penalty with only 3 players on the ice - the second penalty's time doesn't start until the first one runs out (and the first player is not allowed back on the ice when that penalty ends)?

They added a second player because you can only have at minimum 3 players on the ice. So since the overtime format is 4 on 4 and the USA had two penalties and Canada had one, you can't play 3 on 2. They were playing 3 on 3 due to both teams having one penalty each, so when the USA got another one they had to add a player to each team to make it 4 on 3.

In regards to your point about starting the second penalty when the first one runs out, it kind of defeats the benefit of being up two players and negates the difficulties of being short two players.

Yeah, I understood they couldn't go to 3 on 2, but adding a player entirely defeats the purpose of playing 4 on 4 in OT.

I'm curious what would have happened had 5 more seconds elapsed (in rewatching it, I discovered that oVo's original post was technically correct, the Canadian player had served the penalty and was stepping out of the box as the goal was scored, but had no impact on the play), such that the first American penalty had ended. It would have been 5 on 4 at that point. If there happened to be a whistle between the first American serving the penalty and the second American, do we drop back to 4 on 3? Or if both penalties run out without stopping play, do we continue playing 5 on 5 until the next whistle?

It adds a great element of inconsistency to the game. I've not been a fan of the IIHF rules for most of this (why can't the goalies have a water bottle on top of the net?!) and especially hate that the women play by different rules than the men (full-cages, no hitting). This is just another aspect of inconsistent rules.

I'm kind of glad the women never resorted to fighting like the 2 teams have in the past.

I would have found that embarrassing and awkward for both countries.

denominator wrote: I'm curious what would have happened had 5 more seconds elapsed (in rewatching it, I discovered that oVo's original post was technically correct, the Canadian player had served the penalty and was stepping out of the box as the goal was scored, but had no impact on the play), such that the first American penalty had ended. It would have been 5 on 4 at that point. If there happened to be a whistle between the first American serving the penalty and the second American, do we drop back to 4 on 3? Or if both penalties run out without stopping play, do we continue playing 5 on 5 until the next whistle?

I'm pretty (90%) sure this is correct for NHL and I'd imagine that, reading other posts, this is true for IIHF hockey too.

I didn't watch the game but read that the US lost a 2 goal lead with ~3 minutes left. Sorry, but the US didn't deserve a win if they blow that type of lead.

I hadn't seen the highlights yet and didn't realize the USA lead was 2-0 with less than five minutes to play. USA also missed an empty net prior to Canada tying the game to send it into OT. A fine comeback and eleventh Gold for the Canadian Women in World Hockey/Olympic Championships.

denominator wrote:
Yeah, I understood they couldn't go to 3 on 2, but adding a player entirely defeats the purpose of playing 4 on 4 in OT.

I'm curious what would have happened had 5 more seconds elapsed (in rewatching it, I discovered that oVo's original post was technically correct, the Canadian player had served the penalty and was stepping out of the box as the goal was scored, but had no impact on the play), such that the first American penalty had ended. It would have been 5 on 4 at that point. If there happened to be a whistle between the first American serving the penalty and the second American, do we drop back to 4 on 3? Or if both penalties run out without stopping play, do we continue playing 5 on 5 until the next whistle?

It adds a great element of inconsistency to the game. I've not been a fan of the IIHF rules for most of this (why can't the goalies have a water bottle on top of the net?!) and especially hate that the women play by different rules than the men (full-cages, no hitting). This is just another aspect of inconsistent rules.

The OT penalty rules are the same in the NHL in the regular season. It is kind of inconsistent with the premise of 4 on 4 OT, but it is what it is. The IIHF rule of no water bottles on the net is just dumb. As a former goalie, I can attest to the fact that you need that water. That is just cruel not allowing them to have it when the players can eat a hot dog on the bench if they wanted to.

So happy for the win, didn't like the way the Finns played so it would've been extra painful to lose today. They showed little honour as both Granlund and Selanne dove to get a penalty. Both managed to fool the referee, Selanne's dive got Finland a 1.5 minute 5-3 powerplay. Granlund continued to dive throughout the game and at times it looked like he had never stood on skates with the way he fell. No finnish sisu in this game.

Looking forward to the final, I'd prefer to see USA in the final, I think the way USA plays suits Sweden a little bit better than the way Canada plays. Either way it's going to be exciting and I like our chances against either team.

Army of GOD wrote:

denominator wrote: I'm curious what would have happened had 5 more seconds elapsed (in rewatching it, I discovered that oVo's original post was technically correct, the Canadian player had served the penalty and was stepping out of the box as the goal was scored, but had no impact on the play), such that the first American penalty had ended. It would have been 5 on 4 at that point. If there happened to be a whistle between the first American serving the penalty and the second American, do we drop back to 4 on 3? Or if both penalties run out without stopping play, do we continue playing 5 on 5 until the next whistle?

I'm pretty (90%) sure this is correct for NHL and I'd imagine that, reading other posts, this is true for IIHF hockey too.

I didn't watch the game but read that the US lost a 2 goal lead with ~3 minutes left. Sorry, but the US didn't deserve a win if they blow that type of lead.

I didn't realize it was the same in the NHL, given that NHL refs are afraid to call penalties in OT. It was refreshing to see infractions called in OT yesterday.

oVo wrote:I hadn't seen the highlights yet and didn't realize the USA lead was 2-0 with less than five minutes to play. USA also missed an empty net prior to Canada tying the game to send it into OT. A fine comeback and eleventh Gold for the Canadian Women in World Hockey/Olympic Championships.

The missed empty net was a stroke of luck each way. The linesman made a terrible play to let the puck out of the zone (luck for the Americans) and then the Canadians were lucky they hit the post.

Gillipig wrote:So happy for the win, didn't like the way the Finns played so it would've been extra painful to lose today. They showed little honour as both Granlund and Selanne dove to get a penalty. Both managed to fool the referee, Selanne's dive got Finland a 1.5 minute 5-3 powerplay. Granlund continued to dive throughout the game and at times it looked like he had never stood on skates with the way he fell. No finnish sisu in this game.

Looking forward to the final, I'd prefer to see USA in the final, I think the way USA plays suits Sweden a little bit better than the way Canada plays. Either way it's going to be exciting and I like our chances against either team.

Given the win in curling, and the gold-silver combo in ski cross, CBC is refusing to show highlights from that game yet. Granlund has been doing that all Olympics, but it looked to me that Selanne was being a cagey veteran knowing he could get the 5 on 3 there.

I hate playing Finland. I definitely don't want Canada to end up having to play them for the bronze.