Marek vs. Wyshynski – Game Show Friday!

Well, LUCKY ME! I was today’s contestant on Game Show Friday on Marek vs. Wyshynski. If you’re clueless as to what that is, Wyshynski is Yahoo! Sports’ Puck Daddy. On their Friday radio show, they choose a contestant for Game Show Fridays – a variety of rule-related questions for the NHL. I was given 9 questions to answer. How would you have done?

(1) The goaltender (number 30) gets a minor penalty. Number 12 on the team serves the penalty. Which number shows up on the score clock?

(2) Yes or no. Does a blocked shot count as a missed shot on the game sheet?

(3) When a penalty for both the home and visiting teams occur at the same time, which team is announced first by the public address announcer?

(4) Two players receive off-setting penalties. One of the players is injured and goes to the dressing room. This is still 5-on-5 play. The player in the dressing room gets fixed up and returns to the bench. The penalty expires, but play continues. He jumps on the ice and scores a goal. Does the goal count? (This is the hardest question.)

(5) Both Halak and Elliot get injured. By the rules, a team can play any eligible goaltender (not a random member of the team). He is supposed to get a two-minute warm up, but there is one exception to this rule. Is it on a penalty kill, penalty shot or overtime?

(6) A player is not listed on the game sheet. He scores two goals, and then scores a third, and the officials catch that he is missing on the game sheet. They take away the goal because he is an ineligible player. What happens to the other two goals? Do they count or not?

(7) If another puck other than the legal one appears on the ice. Does play automatically stop? Yes or No?

(8) A penalty shot is awarded to a team. But, the team switches goaltenders to face the shooter. After he faces the penalty shot, how long does he have to stay in net?

(9) Bonus: A player is awarded a penalty shot. But as he’s awarded the penalty shot, he takes a penalty on the play as well. Yes or no – does he get to take the shot?


(1) Number 12 (I went for number 30)

(2) No (Again, wrong.)

(3) Away (Correct, with a bit of help)

(4) No, because he is an ineligible player because he hasn’t been released from the box. (Correct again.)

(5) Penalty Shot (I went with overtime)

(6) Yes (Correct)

(7) No (Correct, with help. The play is whistled dead when there is a change of possession)

(8) Until there is a stoppage in play. (Correct)

(9) Yes, because it happened after the initial penalty. (Correct)

Yep – that’s 6 out of 9 for me. Right out of the NHL Rule Book, which unfairly, I do own (however, I have not read it. It’s huge). Thanks Inside Hockey! How many did you get?

It was fun. You can listen to me here (I’m on around 43:05), and the entire podcast (which I would suggest). Thanks to the guys for including me!


Another one bites the dust.

To much surprise last night, Ken Hitchcock was named the 24th coach in St. Louis Blues history – the 4th in the past 6 seasons – to “relieve” Davis Payne of his duties for the 6-7, 13th place team. Let’s discuss that word – relieve.

According to Merriam Webster, “relieve,” a transit verb, means a : to free from a burden : give aid or help to b : to set free from an obligation, condition, or restriction. With the way this team has played since January 2010 when Payne took over, a “relief” is just what it is – for Payne, that is.

“It’s shocking and it’s disappointing, but in the end, you’re responsible for all the areas of your hockey team,” Payne said. “There were pieces that weren’t firing on all cylinders and it’s under my umbrella of responsibility. But I also can say that we were looking at a favorable schedule ahead and ready to turn the corner.

“That said, if this is what gets things going, then I’m all for it. I wish nothing but the best for the team and this group of guys. They deserve it.”

via No Jackets required: Ken Hitchcock hired by Blues, Payne fired – Puck Daddy – NHL Blog – Yahoo! Sports.

However, is it really his fault? The blues “relieved” Andy Murray back in January 2010 when I was writing for Inside Hockey magazine. I broke the news for MSN. From the first presser, Davidson summed up the mistakes Murray made quite clearly.

“If a kid is not practicing hard or making redundant mistakes over and over again, then maybe he deserves to sit on his butt,” he said. “But if a kid’s making mistake out of passion or out of try and has worked his butt off at practice, stick him back on the ice and let him play.”

So here we are, almost two years later, with Davis Payne being “relieved” for a similar reason – the lack of young player development. Does anyone else find it odd that two good coaches could not help the development of this team over four years?

As I’ve said before, “Coach” is another term for “Scapegoat.” Sure, he creates the lines and earns the respect and trust of his players, however he isn’t the one out there missing practice or shooting goals in his own net.

Do I agree that we needed a change? Of course. This team is built to win, however they just can’t get it together. Do I think Payne is 100 percent to blame? Not at all. Accountability has hurt this team since the lock-out, and until that changes, the Blues won’t.

I do believe that Hitchcock will be a nice switch, however his coaching style is quite similar to Andy Murray, and while that will benefit our new veteran leadership, I’m not sure how the young guys will take it. In a perfect world, they will adapt well and quickly. With a five-game home stand, there is no better time for Hitchcock to take the rains and go. Let’s just hope the team is behind him, 100 percent.