The progress that I see in his approach is far too slow for my liking, and his swing is still all over the place, in my opinion. He wants to hit everything 450 feet down the left field line. I want to see more of him trying to drive the ball anywhere instead and not constantly looking like he is confused by every…

That’s....yep....

Franco is just not a good hitter. He has the power, but doesn’t have any idea about how to approach an AB. The Phillies are not really loaded at 1B. Rhys Hoskins is their guy, but he just got promoted to AAA this year. I suspect ToJo will get most of this season, though Hoskins looks good. Andrew Knapp really should…

Three straight sliders down and away. None even close to the zone. None even close to his bat.

Two things...firstly, you can’t tell that bat flip apart from Herrera’s “I just worked a walk” bat flip. He bat flips for everything. It’s the best, in my opinion. Secondly, in two years with 400+ ABs, Hernandez hit .272 and then .294, and now is up to .338 in the early going this year (plus he has four homers—he had…

It’s funny because yesterday on article about the offsides call in the B’s/Sens game, I posted about “wtf is goaltender interference.”

This is correct.

Ball landed right behind those two jackasses. What kind of person goes to a baseball game, has a foul ball come at them, and makes 0-7.8% effort to catch it?!

As a Philadelphia fan, I am required to (though in no way enjoy) say:

For a number of reasons, actually. Because, theoretically at least, offsides and goaltender interference are less judgment calls than most penalties; because, with penalties, there is no arbitrary end to when the penalty stopped effecting the play (as is understood when a puck clears the zone) — rather you could go…

I don’t think it’s a bad rule. Particularly if a team holds the puck for twenty seconds in the offensive zone resulting from the missed offsides. I do think, though, that there should be a rule that coaches challenge offsides when it occurs, and if a goal is scored, it is immediately check.

That’s fair enough—though I still think that I could argue that the advantage there is not due to the missed offsides call, but I don’t really feel like it because I am at work.

This isn’t necessarily true. If the offsides results in the offensive team gaining immediate control of the puck, and then controls it for twenty seconds, then there was an obvious advantage. And even if the other team is able to gain control, but fails to clear (because there is pressure on them that should not…

This is irrelevant because penalties are not reviewable.

No. It’s my understanding that when the puck leaves the zone, that the offsides call that was missed is no longer relevant or able to be challenged. Which is good because the missed offsides would have had no effect on the Bruins giving up that goal.

But, in that hypothetical, they may have cleared the puck poorly because of pressure that should not have happened. The spirit of the game is that play stops on offsides. This was offsides. The play should have stopped.

I don’t have a problem with curtailing it—particularly putting in time limits to decide (this is especially true for baseball, where it seems like they get as much time as they need), but this play was offsides. It should have stopped.

I think the argument that it happened twenty seconds later is crap. If they had had to go back and get back onsides, then the puck probably isn’t in the Sen’s zone, or a Bruin doesn’t win a race to a loose puck, or any number of things change.

To be fair, it does seem like odd timing. He’s found not-guilty of a double homicide, then decides that it is time to off himself?