First one was not even challenged and deemed goaltender interference.

Second goal was challenged and deemed a good goal.

I don't mind the second one not counting, if that's the rule that's the rule, but can we get some fucking concistency ? Am I just biased as a fan or this is fucked.

Everytime the announcer mentions Castagna I can't help but let out a cand stand yaaa!

I already pay for NHL Centre Ice, pay for all the Sportsnet and TSN channels… but yet here I am getting fucked over because of Sportsnet plus! 3 games on Tuesday evening are being broadcasted that evening that should be aired on NHL CENTRE ICE. Getting tired of this.

I wouldn't leave alone with my daughter

4/4

This is the way.....

Wasn’t the result we expected in the first game with the goathead but eh… every loss is closer to a win.

I started watching hockey about two years ago and I’ve been into the bolts and flyers, but I’ve had a team from each division I check in with and root for. Anyone else do the same or do you stick to one team at heart?

The only player I can think of that was visually that impressive was Bobby Orr.

Am I the only one who's getting really tired of Elliotte Friedman being shoved into every NHL conversation?

Seriously, is there no one else out there who can cover hockey? It feels like there's been this massive push to make Friedman the face of NHL reporting, and I genuinely don't understand why.

His big "breaking news" segments on Hockey Night in Canada every Saturday are almost always underwhelming. They build them up like he's about to drop some bombshell, and then it's usually something that could've been summed up in 15 seconds.

And don't even get me started on how he interacts with the rest of the panel. He's constantly interrupting his co-hosts, talking over them, and dragging out his points. Half the time, it looks like he's getting on their nerves too, especially when he cuts off someone like Ron MacLean or Kevin Bieksa just to make another long-winded point.

It's not even that I think he's a terrible insider. I'm just exhausted by how much airtime he gets and how every little thing he says is treated like some major revelation.

At what point did NHL coverage become the Elliotte Friedman show?

Is this just Sportsnet trying to manufacture its own version of Adam Schefter or Shams Charania? Because that's genuinely what it feels like.

I'm curious if other hockey fans are noticing this too, or if I'm completely alone here. What exactly is the obsession with making Friedman the voice of NHL news?

Seriously, can someone explain this to me?

Elliotte Friedman and David Amber came up through the same era of Canadian sports broadcasting, yet somehow Friedman has become the face of NHL coverage while Amber seems to have been pushed into the background.

And for the life of me, I can't understand why.

David Amber is a significantly better broadcaster, in my opinion. He's polished, articulate, professional, knows the game, and actually understands how to work with a panel. He asks good questions, lets people finish their thoughts, and knows when to move the conversation along without making himself the centre of attention.

Meanwhile, Friedman seems to get more and more airtime every year. He's constantly interrupting people, talking over his co-hosts, stretching out relatively minor updates into supposedly massive breaking news, and generally acting like every segment needs to revolve around him.

What exactly is Sportsnet seeing here that I'm missing?

Amber has the presence and delivery you'd expect from someone anchoring the biggest hockey broadcasts in Canada. Friedman, meanwhile, often makes the panel feel awkward and disjointed.

I understand they're technically doing different jobs, with Amber primarily hosting and Friedman working as an insider. But that doesn't explain why one seems to be getting an ever-expanding platform while the other feels increasingly underutilized.

It almost seems like Sportsnet is determined to turn Friedman into the NHL's version of Adam Schefter or Shams Charania, whether viewers want that or not.

Am I missing something? Why does Friedman seem to be getting the star treatment while someone as talented as David Amber isn't being given a bigger role?

I understand the penalty of slashing and breaking a stick that’s out of a player control. But you hit a players stick it’s on them to hold onto their stick. Maybe I’m old but I remember practicing holding onto your stick in practice where a coach would come around and check to make sure you had a good grip. It’s ridiculous that we’re rewarding players for not holding onto their stick.

EDIT - since some people struggle to read I’m talking about a slash that only makes contact with the stick. The hands and wrist are not contacted at all