Flyers mock Tampa's 1-3-1

anton · Post by **anton** » Wed Nov 09, 2011 11:55 pm

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3lpMxc4f ... r_embedded[/youtube]

flyers come off a little butt hurt here, but its really fuckin funny at the same time. Especially in tampa.

Mash · Post by **Mash** » Thu Nov 10, 2011 12:00 am

I LOVE Tampa for this...the flyers are the highest scoring team in the NHL, and this system held them to one goal and a limited number of shots. According to Rule 63.1 which states:

63.1 Delaying the Game – A player or a team may be penalized when, in the opinion of the Referee, is delaying the game in any manner.

The flyers could have been assessed a penalty several times in this game...It should be up to the OFFENSE to make the first move up ice, NOT the defense. Plain and simple.

LOVE it for Tampa. Boring to watch, sure, but damn effective.

inferno31 · Post by **inferno31** » Thu Nov 10, 2011 12:06 am

I heard the refs were contacted by the NHL and told not to intervene with "coaching tactics". I thought it was hilarious by the Flyers to do that though, ballsy too.

Mash · Post by **Mash** » Thu Nov 10, 2011 12:09 am

inferno31 wroteCOLONI heard the refs were contacted by the NHL and told not to intervene with "coaching tactics". I thought it was hilarious by the Flyers to do that though, ballsy too.

It was hilarious for sure, but the panel on TSN were talking about not allowing teams to run that defense. That's just silly, teams have been doing it forever. It should be up to the offense to move the puck forward, and unless they change the rulebook that is the way it should be called.

anton · Post by **anton** » Thu Nov 10, 2011 12:12 am

inferno31 wroteCOLONI heard the refs were contacted by the NHL and told not to intervene with "coaching tactics". I thought it was hilarious by the Flyers to do that though, ballsy too.

during the game? im re-watching the first period right now and the refs were on the phone to someone for apparently no reason after vinny's penalty.

Mash · Post by **Mash** » Thu Nov 10, 2011 12:14 am

anton wroteCOLON
inferno31 wroteCOLONI heard the refs were contacted by the NHL and told not to intervene with "coaching tactics". I thought it was hilarious by the Flyers to do that though, ballsy too.
during the game? im re-watching the first period right now and the refs were on the phone to someone for apparently no reason after vinny's penalty.

Ye, I recorded the game too. I'm going to re-watch tomorrow and see what exactly went down.

inferno31 · Post by **inferno31** » Thu Nov 10, 2011 12:28 am

DarrenDreger
League did speak to officiating staff in Tampa Bay, but advised they shouldn't interfere with coaching tactics.

Nick · Post by **Nick** » Thu Nov 10, 2011 12:45 am

I love Philly for saying F-u to a system which would ruin hockey.

That's not on the offense, they own the puck, no way are they delaying the game holding the puck on their own circles. Not one guy attacking ... Ugh gimmie a break, hockey wouldn't have any fans if that becomes popular.

Did you see stamkos, msl or Vinny at all during that? Only player I noticed was pronger cause of how mad he looked about this and jagr because he still broke through a few times (+ many giveaways).

This is why Roy said Boucher ruined the qmjhl - it's not rocket science to play a 1-1-3 , but it does suck for everyone involved.

IMO that was Tampa making a mockery of TBL in front of their home fans. However it got the W in a game they didn't look like they even wanted to be in

inferno31 · Post by **inferno31** » Thu Nov 10, 2011 1:27 am

Nick wroteCOLONI love Philly for saying F-u to a system which would ruin hockey.

That's not on the offense, they own the puck, no way are they delaying the game holding the puck on their own circles. Not one guy attacking ... Ugh gimmie a break, hockey wouldn't have any fans if that becomes popular.

Did you see stamkos, msl or Vinny at all during that? Only player I noticed was pronger cause of how mad he looked about this and jagr because he still broke through a few times (+ many giveaways).

This is why Roy said Boucher ruined the qmjhl - it's not rocket science to play a 1-1-3 , but it does suck for everyone involved.

IMO that was Tampa making a mockery of TBL in front of their home fans. However it got the W in a game they didn't look like they even wanted to be in

What?.. haha I get what your saying though, the 1-3-1 makes for insanely boring hockey. Ridiculous how disciplined his players are into that system though.

Robin Hood · Post by **Robin Hood** » Thu Nov 10, 2011 1:46 am

Whoever sides with Philly on this one is an idiot. I don't even think it's funny. It's the equivalent of complaining to your mom about how the cool kids won't play with you. This is a game. There are rules. Anything within the rules is fair game. And this is not a case where the rules are flawed. Simple. That system got TBL one game from the SCF final last year.

anton · Post by **anton** » Thu Nov 10, 2011 1:55 am

Why are you putting this on philly? Tampas allowed to have a strategy but phillys not? Philly was holding so tampa would chase. Neither team abandoned their gameplan so we had a stalemate. There is no way you can blame philly anymore than you can blame tampa

MSP4LYFE · Post by **MSP4LYFE** » Thu Nov 10, 2011 2:05 am

Nick wroteCOLONI love Philly for saying F-u to a system which would ruin hockey.

That's not on the offense, they own the puck, no way are they delaying the game holding the puck on their own circles. Not one guy attacking ... Ugh gimmie a break, hockey wouldn't have any fans if that becomes popular.

Did you see stamkos, msl or Vinny at all during that? Only player I noticed was pronger cause of how mad he looked about this and jagr because he still broke through a few times (+ many giveaways).

This is why Roy said Boucher ruined the qmjhl - it's not rocket science to play a 1-1-3 , but it does suck for everyone involved.

IMO that was Tampa making a mockery of TBL in front of their home fans. However it got the W in a game they didn't look like they even wanted to be in

Couldn't have said it any better myself, Nick.

MSP4LYFE · Post by **MSP4LYFE** » Thu Nov 10, 2011 2:08 am

SuperMario wroteCOLONWhoever sides with Philly on this one is an idiot. I don't even think it's funny. It's the equivalent of complaining to your mom about how the cool kids won't play with you. This is a game. There are rules. Anything within the rules is fair game. And this is not a case where the rules are flawed. Simple. That system got TBL one game from the SCF final last year.

Your argument is self defeating, if what you say is true than Philadelphia is well within their rights to hold onto the puck in their own zone, it is after all a tactic, and according to you, "anything within the rules is fair game." However in the same post, you remark that anyone who sides with Philly is an idiot...

Post by **Shep** » Thu Nov 10, 2011 10:50 am

SuperMario wroteCOLONWhoever sides with Philly on this one is an idiot. I don't even think it's funny. It's the equivalent of complaining to your mom about how the cool kids won't play with you. This is a game. There are rules. Anything within the rules is fair game. And this is not a case where the rules are flawed. Simple. That system got TBL one game from the SCF final last year.

If I was Philly I would have done it time and time again. If Tampa doesn't challenge me, fuck it. Run down the clock for the rest of the period.

Nick · Post by **Nick** » Thu Nov 10, 2011 12:05 pm

Ye I'd be PISSED if I paid for a seat and the either team was playing a 1-1-3. However when it's the home team, I enjoyed that flyers just flipped them the bird. No way was it the flyers tactic going into the game to run down the clock with the puck in their zone ( in their own circles no less), road game and the first rule of a road game is to limit turnovers and don't let the fans in the hand early.

Post by **Sensfanjosh** » Thu Nov 10, 2011 12:23 pm

This is basically what the Devils did for years, and made them so good is it not? Everyone (even Devils fans) hates watching it cause its akin to watching paint dry but it works.

Robin Hood · Post by **Robin Hood** » Thu Nov 10, 2011 12:43 pm

MSP4LYFE wroteCOLON
SuperMario wroteCOLONWhoever sides with Philly on this one is an idiot. I don't even think it's funny. It's the equivalent of complaining to your mom about how the cool kids won't play with you. This is a game. There are rules. Anything within the rules is fair game. And this is not a case where the rules are flawed. Simple. That system got TBL one game from the SCF final last year.
Your argument is self defeating, if what you say is true than Philadelphia is well within their rights to hold onto the puck in their own zone, it is after all a tactic, and according to you, "anything within the rules is fair game." However in the same post, you remark that anyone who sides with Philly is an idiot...

I was referring to the comments that called TBL's system cheap/the 1-3-1 killing hockey. Which is pretty much what Philly was trying to insinuate. They found it difficult to get around the 1-3-1 hence the tantrum. If holding the puck to run down the clock was the game plan more power to them. But they were throwing a tantrum to get their way. Good on TBL to stick with it. Won them the game.

Nick · Post by **Nick** » Thu Nov 10, 2011 12:46 pm

That didn't win them the game... they were actually down 1-0 in that system.

Robin Hood · Post by **Robin Hood** » Thu Nov 10, 2011 12:49 pm

Nick wroteCOLONThat didn't win them the game... they were actually down 1-0 in that system.

hfboards type comment right here.

Chris · Post by **Chris** » Thu Nov 10, 2011 12:49 pm

Heh. 1-3-1 has been in use since forever. TBL was using it last year too. Not sure why there's vitriol directed at TBL (or the Flyers for that matter), but real hockey fans can see the reason for its usage.

Buds Board Keepers League

Flyers mock Tampa's 1-3-1

Flyers mock Tampa's 1-3-1

Re: Flyers mock Tampa's 1-3-1

Re: Flyers mock Tampa's 1-3-1

Re: Flyers mock Tampa's 1-3-1

Re: Flyers mock Tampa's 1-3-1

Re: Flyers mock Tampa's 1-3-1

Re: Flyers mock Tampa's 1-3-1

Re: Flyers mock Tampa's 1-3-1

Re: Flyers mock Tampa's 1-3-1

Re: Flyers mock Tampa's 1-3-1

Re: Flyers mock Tampa's 1-3-1

Re: Flyers mock Tampa's 1-3-1

Re: Flyers mock Tampa's 1-3-1

Re: Flyers mock Tampa's 1-3-1

Re: Flyers mock Tampa's 1-3-1

Re: Flyers mock Tampa's 1-3-1

Re: Flyers mock Tampa's 1-3-1

Re: Flyers mock Tampa's 1-3-1

Re: Flyers mock Tampa's 1-3-1

Re: Flyers mock Tampa's 1-3-1