In article <1993Apr20.163027.28425@jarvis.csri.toronto.edu> yaska@eecg.toronto.edu (Yaska Sankar) writes:  >>>Paul Stewart is the worst and most biased ref. presently in the NHL. >>>WE WAS ROBBED!!!!  >>No.  Patrick Roy is the reason the game was lost, and Ron Hextall is the >>reason Quebec won.   >I don't buy this at all. Roy was the reason the game was tied... and that >would *not* have been the case had Dionne kept his cool.  >Roy stood on his  >head for the first 15 minutes of the game when the Nords were rushing from  >end-to-end. Kamensky's mini-break after the tying goal and the first shot by  >Young in OT were both excellent chances stopped by Roy. Roy outplayed  >Hextall for most of the game, but Roy becomes the villain and Hextall  >the hero because Roy's team didn't make full use of their opportunities.  Whoa.  What you are effectively doing is implying that if a player plays really well, he 'stores up' mistakes that can be used at a later time.  Ths is not so.  Roy is the 'villain', as you so succinctly put it, because he allowed a very cheap goal.  If you think Roy outplayed Hextall, perhaps you should get a tape of the game and watch the first 7-8 minutes of the third period.  NHL goaltenders _make_ some great saves.  If they did not, they would not be in the NHL in the first place.  I do not expect any particular goalie to be able to make the great saves all of the time, even though they are occasionally required.  However, when it comes to a routine shot like Sakic's, especially at such a crucial time in a game, I don't think there  are any legitimate excuses.   >Hextall, on the other hand, had a lot of lucky bounces  >[description of lucky bounces.....] >Hextall wasn't particularly brilliant on those plays ...   I am not arguing that Hextall was brilliant.  I am arguing is that a relatively weak wrist shot from the outside of the circle shold not result  in a goal.   > ... but it was just the 1 goal. The timing stank, but against >an explosive team like Quebec, they gave them 1 opportunity too many with >a powerplay that was totally unnecessary.  In a one-goal game with less than a minute to go there is no such thing as 'just the 1 goal'.  I have not defended Dionne for taking the penalty either...in fact I think it was a boneheaded move.  But it led to _one_ goal only, and Montreal had a _two_ goal lead.  My main concern is the second  goal.  >This most certainly was a team loss... Leclair missed his opportunities, >as did Bellows and Brunet. Dionne took a bad penalty. Damphousse and Lebeau >were *silent*. Carbonneau and Savard were a step behind all night. Roy gave >up the bad goal. Roy, by no means, can be singled out for this loss.  What you say about the skaters is absolutely true.  But realize that the  game was effectively *won*.  You could watch any hockey game (in fact, you could watch any sporting event period) and spend hours discussing the 'what if's' w.r.t. missed opportunities.  They are not important when the final result is decided.  If I get the time soon, I'll watch the game again and email you a list of lucky Montreal bounces and a list of Quebec offensive screwups.  Montreal was _leading_ with a minute to go.  The goalie is the last line of defence, and I will grant that extra attention is focussed on him, sometimes without justification.  But Roy gave up a *lousy* goal, and a team cannot afford such a goal.  >>Roy looked like a player in an industrial league on Sakic's shot.  >And Hextall didn't on Dionne's goal? Please.   WHO CARES?  Of what value is it to justify one lousy play with a totally unrelated lousy play?  I could do a Hextall critique if you'd like.  But if you're going to assess his performance, keep in mind that he made the key saves at the key times.  >Roy is paid big money because >that is his value compared to other goalies ... and he still is in the top 5  For the record, I did not say that Roy was not one of the top goaltenders in the league.  In fact, I agree that he is.  >The Montreal media is the quickest to heap praise and then hurl derogatory >comments against the Habs. They are no better than uninformed fans.                              I assume you are referring to me.  However, I have pointed out that I think the loss can be blamed on Roy.  I have not said he sucks, nor do I think I've made any other 'derogatory comments'.  If you regard objective (and informed, FYI) observations as derogatory, I really can't help you.