Expressly Canadian (Gm 7)
May 13, 2010, by Homme De Sept-Iles
Thoughts while watching the game again in compacted format
Montreal v Pittsburgh, Game Five
Crob had 12 shots in six games coming into this seventh game. I ask you, are these champion’s numbers? And I ask again. Don’t bother.
Crosby’s initial penalty. Champion’s play? Don’t bother. He incurred it within the first thirty seconds and it was a legit call. Cross-checked Gorges. Isn’t cross-checking our Disney’s favourite tactic?
Fleury should have had that first goal. Stopped it, I mean. Subban has physicality to his movement that is different from any player that I can recall on the blue line. More as I observe.
Rule suggestion: If a player makes a second attempt to rough up a goalie; ten minute misconduct. Third attempt is a game misconduct. First attempt would be whatever is in place currently or refs’ discretion. Ref’s discretion?
On Moore’s goal, Orpik had Lapierre behind the net and was shoving him up against the netting and holding him there for more than three seconds after the puck left Lapierre’s stick. Just shoving him. That’s an interference call. But Benoit Brunet says he’s ok with that kind of play. Benoit is getting a bit more lenient with the thuggishness as the playoffs go on and I wonder if he is being influenced by the dominant ideology; are people saying things to cow the younger colour man? And Orpik is the Glenn Kulka of the NHL.
And his nonsense cost his team a goal. So the math works out.
Plekanec’ shadowing of Crosby was thorough; Plekanec’ quickness allowed him to foil Crosby’s entry on a shift and then a whack of a stick on the same shift (in the slot) resulted in taking away a scoring shot.
I’m reminded of some of the fine work that Carbonneau supplied against Gretzky in the Finals in 1993. Speed versus speed. Martin and Muller are working well together. And Pearn, I imagine. Muller was, of course, a key component of that 1993 Stanley Cup run and would have seen Carbonneau’s work up close.
Gretzky was shut down en route to a four games to one series win for Montreal.
Brunet’s explanation of the Montreal forecheck in the first period sinks in for me on the second viewing. On a late-period Penguin possession, with about 1:20 left in the period, we can see Andrei Kostitsyn as a lone deep forechecker with Plekanec and Cammalleri hanging much further back just above the Montreal blue line. Both players block passing lanes and force defenceman Mark Eaton to pass into coverage which results in a long puck retrieved by Montreal; loss of possession. Brunet elaborates saying that Pittsburgh’s forwards aren’t helping their passers (the defencemen) by curling back to the puck. He stresses the open space between the Penguin circles up to the red centre line.
Brunet’s post-period comment that the first ten minutes tempest expected from Pittsburgh was negated by the two early penalties is a key.
What kind of man lets others dictate his sense of right and wrong? Watch the second period and you’ll see. Crosby slides into Halak and then claims it was Gill’s fault. Crosby’s expression on rising and at the bench tells it all. The dollar bill fades a little.
Cammalleri’s second period goal is directly a result of Andrei Kostitsyn’s forecheck which unexpectedly but through hard work, produces a turnover, a point pass to Spacek and a one-timer for Cammalleri.
Brutal lack of effort on Moen’s goal from Gonchar. Just watched Moen walk around him for a free shot. Mystifying. Unimpressive.
It was 4-0 at that point with about five minutes elapsed in the second period.
Pittsburgh was fortunate not to drop to 5-0 within a minute of that goal. Three point-blank chances were mishandled by the Canadiens.
Brunet exults late in the second with the score 4-1 in favour of Montreal that this is the best game Montreal has played in the series. He then adds for emphasis; in all aspects of the game. This kind of comment from a colour man just isn’t precise enough for me. For example, Montreal is certainly not doing their series’ best on faceoffs. Is Brunet overwhelmed by the scoreboard? To me, the colour man is there to provide depth and detail. Exuberance is for the play-by-play fellow.
You know, I wouldn’t want to be stuck in a well with Jordan Staal looking down at me.
More and more, Andrei Kostitsyn reminds me of Ace Frehley. He is absent-minded. Went on the ice for a short-handed situation and had to be called back to the bench area. Absent-minded. Shy. And the ability of a berserker. I hope Montreal finds a way to reach these two.