best hairstyles for women with thinning hair

Guest recap: Rangers v. Senators, game 2

*None of us were able to get the recap last night, so the always reliable friend of the blog Glen Miller was able to give us an assist.  Don’t forget to give Glen’s current project, Fan Junkies a look, and follow Glen on Twitter.  Thanks again Glen!

If evidence was needed to prove a hotly contested playoff series can turn any two teams into bitter rivals, look no further than the series between the Rangers and Senators. Prior to this postseason affair between the two it would have been unlikely to hear any fan of one describe the other club as a rival. That has all changed after game two of the series, won by the Senators 3 – 2 in OT.

Now, on to the game.

Period One

  • Sens coach Paul MacLean set the tone for the contest before the opening puck drop by inserting Zenon Konopka and Matt Carkner into the lineup in place of Kaspars Daugavins and Matt Gilroy. The goal was clear; MacLean wanted to play a more physical brand of hockey. It would take just 2:15 for the game to get physical.

Apparently not happy with Brian Boyle’s actions toward young defenseman Erik Karlsson in game one, Carkner went looking for the Rangers big center. He found him and appeared to challenge Boyle to a fight, something Boyle seemed to decline. Carkner wouldn’t take no for an answer and sucker-punched Boyle, knocking him to the ice before throwing several more punches to the body.

A melee ensued with all 10 skaters joining in. With Carkner landing punch after punch and the linesmen late in getting involved, Brandon Dubinsky would jump in to remove Carkner from Boyle. Once order was restored, for the moment at least, the officials would gather to decide on the resulting penalties.

Carkner would get two for roughing, a five-minute major for fighting and a game misconduct. Dubinsky surprisingly would also get two for roughing and a game misconduct for being third guy in an altercation. The Rangers would end up with a full five-minute PP chance out of it all. Unfortunately the Blue Shirts couldn’t get anything going on their first man-advantage opportunity.

  • Chris Neil would continue the Senators targeting of Boyle when he too challenged Boyle at 8:17. This time Boyle would accept the invitation. The fight didn’t last long and no one landed any big-time punches but it was important for Boyle to stand up for himself.
  • Just 0:15 later, Sergei Gonchar would take a tripping penalty and give the Rangers their second man-advantage. This time the Blue Shirts would capitalize with Anton Stralman sneaking a slapshot by Craig Anderson. The goal was assisted by Dan Girardi and Artem Anisimov. For Anisimov it was his third assist of the series.
  • The goalies would trade great saves late in the period. Hank would stop a deking Nick Foligno with the right pad on a mini-breakaway. Anderson, following a late elbowing penalty to Chris Phillips, stoned Ryan Callahan all alone in front of the cage with just 0:46 left in the period.
  • The first frame would end with each team getting 10 shots on goal and the Rangers holding onto a 1 – 0 lead.

Period Two

  • The Rangers controlled play for the better part of the first half of period two out-chancing the Senators 6 – 1 according the numbers given by NBCSN.
  • During the physical first period, the Rangers maintained discipline. That changed in period two. Carl Hagelin got his elbow up into the head of Ottawa captain Daniel Alfredsson on a check along the LW boards at 10:32. The refs would assess a major penalty to the Rangers rookie and the Senators would take advantage.
  • Karlsson, held in check for much of the game to this point, drew the Sens even on the ensuing PP. From behind the goal line on the RW side Karlsson snapped a puck toward the front of the net where it deflected off the skate of Michael Del Zotto and into the net. Filip Kuba earned the lone assist on the goal.
  • Later Karlsson appeared to get away with a slew foot to Richards but the referees certainly did catch the retaliation and penalized Richards two minutes for roughing. The Rangers would kill off the PP.
  • Despite an early advantage in play, the Rangers would only finish the period with a 12 – 10 lead in shots.

Third Period

  • Boyle would gain a measure of revenge and nearly record his second consecutive game-winning goal when he beat Anderson with a wrist shot similar to the one he potted Thursday. Ruslan Fedotenko and Del Zotto assisted.
  • The Rangers seemed to be closing in on a two-game series lead until Nick Foligno would again knot the game up for the Senators. A shot attempt by Konopka kicked off Del Zotto and right onto the stick of Foligno. The Senators forward was able to flick the biscuit by Hank. Kyle Turris was credited with the secondary assist.
  • Girardi would nearly put the Rangers ahead with less than three minutes to go. He slipped in from the right point and accepted a feed for a point blank opportunity but Anderson stopped Girardi’s snapshot.

OT

  • It wouldn’t take long for Ottawa to end the suspense in the extra session. With heavy traffic and action around Hank, Chris Neil banged home the rebound of a Zack Smith shot just 1:17 in and helped pull the Senators even with the Rangers in the series.

Final Thoughts

  • Ottawa executed their game plan well. They wanted to play physical and they did. They got a ton of traffic to the front of the Rangers net and made things tougher on Hank. This game is further evidence why Paul MacLean is getting attention for a Jack Adams nomination.
  • The Rangers game plan seems to be to take the body whenever Karlsson has the puck but were credited with just two on the young rearguard tonight. Yet early on it seemed as if Karlsson was turnover prone and hesitant as he appeared to be worried about getting hit. The plan can be successful but if they give him room Karlsson can hurt them.
  • The Rangers played well defensively again, particularly against the Spezza line. His trio was held off the shore sheet and combined for just three shots on goal. Having the last change has allowed Torts to use the McDonagh/Girardi pair against the Spezza line and the Rangers have successfully neutralized the Senators three top goal scorers. That could be more difficult in Ottawa.
  • I don’t believe the Hagelin elbow was purposeful but with Alfredsson exiting the game and not returning I would expect a suspension. It seems the number one criteria when determining if a play is suspension-worthy is whether the or not the recipient of the hit was hurt. Since Alfredsson missed the balance of the game this would fit the necessary criteria.
  • Watching the game live I was confused as to how they considered Dubinsky to be the third man in the altercation/mugging between Boyle and Carkner. Of course Dubinsky was simply aiding a teammate who was being mercilessly pounded and not actually intervening in a fair fight between willing combatants.

For clarification purposes, I consulted the rule book. Here’s the excerpt from Rule 46.16, Third Man In as found on the NHL.com website:

“A game misconduct penalty, at the discretion of the Referee, shall be imposed on any player who is the first to intervene (third man in) in an altercation already in progress except when a match penalty is being imposed in the original altercation. This penalty is in addition to any other penalties incurred in the same incident.

This rule also applies to subsequent players who elect to intervene in the same or other altercations during the same stoppage of play.

Generally, this rule is applied when a fight occurs.”

The key phrase there is, “except when a match penalty is being imposed in the original altercation.” That’s exactly what happened with Carkner being tossed from the contest for jumping Boyle. So why then was Dubinsky tossed for his intervention?

Who knows how or if Dubinsky’s absence impacted the rest of the game but it seems clear the refs missed this call here.

The series takes a day off on Sunday before going back at it in Ottawa on Monday night, 7pm.

 

33 Responses to “Guest recap: Rangers v. Senators, game 2”

  1. Chris F says:

    You guys missed a really intense game.

    Thanks for you insights, Glen.

  2. Leatherneckinlv says:

    Rangers beat themselves in this game. The offense and powerplay better get going or the rough stuff from Ottawa will continue. It was a fun game to watch.

  3. Justin says:

    I was skating so I had to watch the game on DVR…unfortunately it was way to late to be able to write the recap. I don’t understand for the life of me how Dubinsky got a match. In order to be a third man in there has to be an actual “fight”. Boyle was just being pummeled by Carkner with his gloves on. Dubi was just trying to do the ref’s job by keeping a defenseless player from getting worked over.

    • The Suit says:

      Agreed. That was a bullshit call from two notably inconsistent refs in Walkom and Watson. And surprise surprise, Watson was one half of the ensemble that missed the infamous slew foot on Ryan Callahan.

      • Chris F says:

        Actually, the way the rule is written, the misconduct can be given for the third man in on any altercation, and any successive player in on the altercation.

        Generally, I’ve only ever seen it dealt out on a traditional fight, though, which this surely was not.

        However, as Glen noted, the misconduct is not to be dealt out to the third man in on an altercation in which there is already a match penalty. In other words, since Carkner got a game misconduct for jumping Boyle, Dubinsky was allowed, according to the rule book, to intervene.

        Horrible call all around.

  4. Walt says:

    Yes, Boyle was jumped, but where was Rupp, Prust, or Bickel? The refs sucked last night, but with the third period only some 5 minutes old, we start that stupid defensive scheme, where it’s almost automatic, you lose. I hope the boys learned a lesson, peddel to the metal, no let up, period!

    Line up for game three:
    Scott, Prust, Rupp, Bickel, Dubi. then let the fire works begin.

    One last thought, Brian this off season, continue your skating lessons, and take some boxing lessons as well. Your a big dude, show some balls!

    • Chris F says:

      Agreed. With his size, I don’t know how Boyle gets rag-dolled every time he fights.

    • The Suit says:

      Walt Torts wasn’t running any sort of prevent defense. They just weren’t able to get their 5 on 5 offense going because of all the inconsistent penalties.

      • Justin says:

        Correct me if I’m wrong Suit, since your the systems guy, but it looked like at about the 10 min mark of the third the forecheck got scaled back to a 1-4 or a 1-2-2…

        • The Suit says:

          They run an occasional 1-2-2 when they’re unable to get the puck deep, or coming off of a line change, but that hasn’t changed all season. I just thought guys were easing up a bit so not to take another penalty.

      • Walt says:

        Suit

        That is two games in a row that we incorporated that damn defense, and got scored on both games. The team sat on a lead, tried to stand up at the blue line, and the rest is history. Play hard for 60 minutes, don’t let up, especially if you have your foot on their throat, go for the kill!!!!!

        • The Suit says:

          Walt you are my boy and all, but the Rangers have been using that neutral zone defense when they don’t get the puck deep all season. For that specific goal they were coming off of a line change. Almost every team in the NHL uses a 1-2-2 coming off of a change. And the Rangers were still sending three guys after the puck late in the third btw, just not on that particular goal.

  5. kc says:

    Why weren’t Mitchell and Bickel, two guys responsible for ‘turning the season around’ getting more ice time?
    Carkner didn’t get a match penalty, did he? Based on the way the rule is written, the seven other guys who jumped in should have gotten games as well.
    Missing form the report, the stupidity of MDZ being that close to the goal when there wasn’t a threat and Hank being WAY to deep in his crease on the game tying game goal.

    • Justin says:

      Kc, Carkner did get a match penalty and has a hearing today, as for MDZ, it was just an unfortunate play. Bad bounce. Hank always plays that deep in his net, and I wouldn’t have him change just to prevent a fluky play like that.

      I would have liked to see Rupp out there to challenge Neil, he was way too involved physically with our star players with no reprecussions.

    • The Suit says:

      With so much special teams play and it being such a close game with such tight officiating, I wasn’t surprised at all by Bickel, Rupps, lack of playing time. Plus it wasn’t like Carkner, Obrien, and Condra got a ton of mins.

  6. kc says:

    It was a bad bounce created by MDZs awful positioning, there’s no reason to be that close to the goalie on that play.
    The Lundqvist play I’m referring to is Foligno’s goal, Hank actually had one leg IN the net, if he’s at the top of the crease Foligno never has a chance. The reason, he got bumped and pushed back all night.
    Show me a boxscore where carkner has a match penalty. He got 5 for fighting, not intent to injure.

    • Justin says:

      http://scores.espn.go.com/nhl/boxscore?gameId=400259097

      At 2:15 Carkner for 2:00 for instigator and 10 minute game misconduct.

      As for Hank’s positioning on the Foligno goal, I had no problem with it. If you watch the replay you can see that Turris deflected the puck through Staal’s legs to Foligno. Hank still has play that lane. Plus he just missed the Foligno shot on a chance he had no business stopping anyway.

  7. Justin says:

    Plus most of Hanks lateral excellence comes from how deep he plays in the net. Sure if he’s at the top of the crease he may have a better chance at that shot, but you are asking to change his entire goaltending paradigm for a better chance on one play.

  8. kc says:

    A ‘match’ penalty is intent to injury, not a misconduct, not an instigator, a match penalty was not called. I agree that Dubi shouldn’t have been thrown out, but by the wording of the rule they did the right thing, doesn’t make it right.
    By playing deep in the net, are you suggesting hank usually has one leg in the net? Bottom line, he was too deep, even for him, watch the goal again, there’s no arguing it.

    • Justin says:

      My mistake on the match penalty situation. I actually didn’t realize there was a difference between a match penalty and a game misconduct…

      On the Hank discussion, his depth was consistent with his usual play. It’s not like his leg was resting against the padding in the back of the net. His foot went about 3-6 inches over the line momentarily as he was pivoting to square himself the to play. The bottom line is that Turris made a great play to get that puck through Staal and Hank had an incredibly small chance of stopping that puck and he still came damn close,

  9. kc says:

    C’mon man, does he usually pivot with his foot in the net, he effed up, bottom line, doesn’t make him the goat, just makes him a contributor to the loss. If his teammates had done more to protect him throughout, he probably would have been more aggressive.
    Clicking thumbs up after your posts and thumbs down after mine doesn’t help your cause, you’re wrong on this.

    • Justin says:

      Just for the record, I’m on the mobile site so I can’t see the thumbs.

      Anyway, I’m not saying that there is nothing Hank could have done differently to prevent the Foligno goal. I am simply saying that his execution on that play is consistent with his style. No style is perfect and you take the good and you take the bad with each one. My point is you don’t get to pick and choose based on a play that irritates you. His style has suited him pretty well for the last 7 years or so and I wouldn’t try to invalidate it based on one low percentage shot that he allowed at an inconvenient time.

      • The Suit says:

        KC, we have nothing to do with how the votes swing with people’s comments. We have thousands of people reading these posts everyday and often times people vote when they agree/disagree with something.

        Telling people they are wrong in their opinions all the time isn’t going to be well received, especially when you are calling out someone who teaches goaltending. Just a humble suggestion…

  10. VinceR says:

    It is also a feature of most blog comment sections. Pretty common. Also it only allows each person to vote once per comment based on cookies etc.

    In fact, I’m going to go give a thumbs up/down for each one above to demonstrate.

  11. Steven Smith says:

    You guys are missing the main point from the rule book………..” at the discretion of the Referee….” that is all you need to know. Ref’s discretion, and he made a very poor decision.

    • Jackson says:

      Understanding the difference between a match penalty and a game misconduct helps clear things up as well. Still, it was an absolutely ridiculous call any way you look at it.

  12. rob sahm says:

    it wouldnt surprize me to see scott dress for the game what does the sens want the rangers to do let karlsson just do what he wants and skate into the offensive zone to do his damage screw that we have to be pyhisical with him boyle is just doing his job and maclean needs to shave his wyatt earp stache that clown this series is over in 5 rangers winning it

  13. Chris says:

    Seemed to me the Rangers took Ottawa’s bait and lost discipline, ex: the Hagelin elbow and Richards penalty. This one was depressing, my son and I have been down in the dumps all day. Ridiculous how Duby got tossed. Put Scott in there Monday, hopefully knock out Neil’s 3 remaining teeth.

  14. Leatherneckinlv says:

    Does anyone else get the feeling that game 3 is a must win situation for our boys?

  15. Chuck A says:

    Does anyone else think the game’s grip was lost by NY upon Hagelin’s penalty? Seemed like they were really bringing heavy pressure at that point.

  16. d says:

    the refs swapping dubi for carkner really **** us over. dubi played a good game in game 1 while carkner is just a bitchass goon.

    anyone else notice the sens much more aggressive forechecking in PKs? really **** us up esp since our PP sucks to begin with.