0:37 "They (Tappara) stretched their lead to 3 goals." 2:10 "... gets an extended goal for Tappara Tampere as they take firm control of this series." Nice narrative fails. Be a bit more cautious next time. :)
Noperkele Samaa mieltä, Pelicansin "fanit" ovat yhdet Liigan huonoimmat johon kuuluu pelkkiä pahoinvoivia teinejä ja kolikoiden viskelijöitä, en kuulu siihen toimintaan millään tavalla. Joten miten se tähän mun edelliseen kommenttiin liittyy millään tavalla?
Well, the whole competition format sucks anyway. Team that wins the last game of the "playoff series" will be out?? And a "home advantage" team has to start its home game from a trailing score, having lost its first visiting game? What a comic mess... Hockey shouldn't be played for sum goal differences in two games at a week's interval. It's about wins. Not about unintuitive and unexciting goal difference counting.
"A home advantage team has to start its home game from a trailing score." I see your point - the "weaker" team wins its home match by 1 goal, and then can theoretically defend 0-0 score in the 2nd leg. In reality, that's very unlikely to work. It only affects them, when they lose the away game with a big margin - which would most likely put them out anyway. The reason for the current format is, that if both matches have the same result (2 goal win for a host, for example) then the team with advantage plays the overtime home. "Hockey shouldn't be played for sum goal differences in two games at a week's interval. It's about wins." Although I agree with this statement, the current system has its reasons. Realize, that the Champions Hockey League is a very new competition. This is the 4th season overall - and the first season, when there are no invites. Many teams don't rank the CHL higher than their domestic league. The attendance isn't that high neither. The teams playing don't financially profit from playing the league. (yet) Because of these reasons, the league isn't that prestigious, and making it BO3 series is quite a risk. (Also, the home team advantage would be much bigger than in the current format) I don't really mind playing for the sum - in the end, when one team is behind by a goal with a minute to go, it works the same. Although, the budget (and therefore prizepool) for the league grows every season, it needs time to get more recognition and importance. This is up to people who take care of the league - I think they're doing a good job, it simply needs time to make some bigger steps. Immature decisions ruined many projects. Be patient, brighter tomorrows might be ahead of us. :)
2:26 the goalie was so far out of his crease how was that called goalie interference
yep thats wrong call
Love playing as Jyvaskyla in EA NHL games
What music on 0:53
0:37 "They (Tappara) stretched their lead to 3 goals."
2:10 "... gets an extended goal for Tappara Tampere as they take firm control of this series."
Nice narrative fails. Be a bit more cautious next time. :)
Yes. Shows how much they care. xD
Eikö Tapparan gloryhunter "fanit" löytäneet hallille? :(
Kas, mikäs pelitönkaani-statisti se sieltä ruikuttaa? Noilla "fanitus"-tyyleillä luulis nokan pysyvän tiukasti pussissa vaan... No glory, no hunt.
Noperkele Samaa mieltä, Pelicansin "fanit" ovat yhdet Liigan huonoimmat johon kuuluu pelkkiä pahoinvoivia teinejä ja kolikoiden viskelijöitä, en kuulu siihen toimintaan millään tavalla. Joten miten se tähän mun edelliseen kommenttiin liittyy millään tavalla?
Niino, sarjaa ku katsoo niin siellä ne voittajat on... missäs se pelikaani luuraa, just saying.
Well, the whole competition format sucks anyway. Team that wins the last game of the "playoff series" will be out?? And a "home advantage" team has to start its home game from a trailing score, having lost its first visiting game? What a comic mess...
Hockey shouldn't be played for sum goal differences in two games at a week's interval. It's about wins. Not about unintuitive and unexciting goal difference counting.
"A home advantage team has to start its home game from a trailing score."
I see your point - the "weaker" team wins its home match by 1 goal, and then can theoretically defend 0-0 score in the 2nd leg. In reality, that's very unlikely to work. It only affects them, when they lose the away game with a big margin - which would most likely put them out anyway.
The reason for the current format is, that if both matches have the same result (2 goal win for a host, for example) then the team with advantage plays the overtime home.
"Hockey shouldn't be played for sum goal differences in two games at a week's interval. It's about wins."
Although I agree with this statement, the current system has its reasons. Realize, that the Champions Hockey League is a very new competition. This is the 4th season overall - and the first season, when there are no invites. Many teams don't rank the CHL higher than their domestic league. The attendance isn't that high neither. The teams playing don't financially profit from playing the league. (yet) Because of these reasons, the league isn't that prestigious, and making it BO3 series is quite a risk. (Also, the home team advantage would be much bigger than in the current format) I don't really mind playing for the sum - in the end, when one team is behind by a goal with a minute to go, it works the same.
Although, the budget (and therefore prizepool) for the league grows every season, it needs time to get more recognition and importance. This is up to people who take care of the league - I think they're doing a good job, it simply needs time to make some bigger steps. Immature decisions ruined many projects. Be patient, brighter tomorrows might be ahead of us. :)