GAME THREAD: Flames V Steelers: Sunday 18th February

[mark]

Rehearsal for the Final Part Deux

[greeny]

Lets keep guildford pegged down and if they want to get physical lets show them we do that as well. Come the cup final hopefully they dread its us they are playing. A close game but hopefully another victory

[smbmetal]

Greenfield gets the start. Would have like to see Morrone get this one. Still no Simpson.

https://eihlhq.co.uk/pdf/print/de-html/3262

Tight game I think, despite our very good record in Guildford. If Guildford want to win, they need to bring the physical side, get in Greenfield’s face as we have proved time and time this season we won’t do anything about it.

3-2 Steelers.

[ginger]

If Guildford want to win, they need to bring the physical side, get in Greenfield’s face as we have proved time and time this season we won’t do anything about it.

Because if that worked, every team would do it and we'd have lost more games? I get you want to see guys drop them at a moments notice but it really doesn't seem to be hurting us at the moment

[smbmetal]

If Guildford want to win, they need to bring the physical side, get in Greenfield’s face as we have proved time and time this season we won’t do anything about it.

Because if that worked, every team would do it and we'd have lost more games? I get you want to see guys drop them at a moments notice but it really doesn't seem to be hurting us at the moment

Thing is though, most of the games I’ve seen teams don’t bring that side of the game. We are waaaay too good if teams let us a play a fast passive game.

The odd occasion teams have brought the physical side we’ve backed off and the opposition have gained some momentum. We don’t see it very often as most of the games are fast paced games which suit us perfectly.

The best example I can give is when we played the exhibition game against the Panthers and Tansey was crossed checked and he went after the player immediately. That wouldn’t happen now, because as I’ve said before I think Fox lays the law down to avoid any retaliation penalties.

Letting Greenfield get taken out in the last game against Guildford, in Ron Shudra’s words on the stream ‘intentionally’ should never be acceptable.

[mark]

Goal ?

0-1 Steelers

VAR REVIEW

[ginger]

If Guildford want to win, they need to bring the physical side, get in Greenfield’s face as we have proved time and time this season we won’t do anything about it.

Because if that worked, every team would do it and we'd have lost more games? I get you want to see guys drop them at a moments notice but it really doesn't seem to be hurting us at the moment

Thing is though, most of the games I’ve seen teams don’t bring that side of the game. We are waaaay to good if teams let us a play a fast passive game.

The odd occasion teams have brought the physical side we’ve backed off and the opposition have gained some momentum. We don’t see it very often as most of the games are fast paced games which suit us perfectly.

The best example I can give is when we played the exhibition game against the Panthers and Tansey was crossed checked and he went after the player immediately. That wouldn’t happen now, because as I’ve said before Fox lays the law down to avoid any retaliation penalties.

Letting Greenfield get taken out in the last game against Guildford, in Ron Shudra’s words on the stream ‘intentionally’ should never be acceptable.

But Tansey did immediately get up and have a go back at Ferguson, who immediately turtled? So if he carries on we lose a powerplay. Again, penalty called for the interference, and wasn't like he ran straight through him - why waste a powerplay opportunity?

There's times to send messages but when you're 2/3 up in a fairly close game, it's often not the right play as can hand more momentum to the opposition.

[mark]

UPDATE

VAR RULES NO GOAL

0-0

[mark]

FIGHT

Sauce v Ripplinger 5 mins each

[mark]

Goal

0-1 Steelers

Marc-Olivier Vallerand
(Saucerman, Balmas)
14:16
PPG