Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

CGY-SS t1_j314ija wrote

It's kind of ridiculous to call a 6-2 loss "they played better" like come on

16

LovelyDadBod t1_j315c5p wrote

Did you watch the game? I’m the first the US was ALL OVER Canada. Evened up in the second with the Canadians taking over in the 3rd a bit.

The US had big scoring chances right to the end, two goals called back (one of which could have gone either way), and the only reason Canada won was a goaltender who stood ok his head.

18

STRIpEdBill t1_j31pnvs wrote

Lol both those were obvious goaltender interference, luke Hughes turn over on the empty better was a perfect representation of team USA's play

9

LovelyDadBod t1_j32iwy9 wrote

I’m a goaltender, have been since I was 8-9 and still play regularly in my 30’s. I also ref.

First one is only interference strictly by the IIHF rules. North American refs would have called it a good goal as it was really incidental contact that also wouldn’t have happened if the D-man didn’t hit him towards the goalie.

Second one was 100% a no-goal

1

Hascus t1_j32lm7n wrote

Exactly, first one is a goal in the NHL for sure

2

iankilledyou t1_j31ug0u wrote

We got outshot, the states had 2 disallowed goals and we scored an empty netter. It was a lot closer than any 6-2 game. You should have watched it, it was a good one.

17

yamiyam t1_j31kxue wrote

Nobody who actually watched the game would say that…hey everybody, this guy only looked at the box score before commenting! Get him!

9

BeefInGR t1_j32217g wrote

People don't read the articles watch the games.

6

Hascus t1_j32fi7i wrote

This commment chain is all anybody ever needs to look at to know that Reddit karma is useless :)

1

yamiyam t1_j32l3qp wrote

Seriously. Milic is literally the only reason Canada won that game. your original comment should not be in the negatives lol

1