pull down to refresh

Look, I'm happy USA won, but I really think 3 on 3 is no way to determine the outcome of this important game. Seems like a shame to cheapen it after 60 minutes of great hockey.

38 sats \ 6 replies \ @HardMoney 4h

Yea, very fluky where a single bounce is the difference

reply
74 sats \ 5 replies \ @siggy47 4h

I didn't see the goal. Was it cheap? There's so much open ice to begin with

reply

It was a nice shot.

reply

Yeah I Hughes was wide open and beat the goalie. Wasn’t a fluky shot

reply
111 sats \ 2 replies \ @HardMoney 3h

Not a fluke goal by any means. The 3 vs 3 game is basically a different sport than 5 vs 5 cause it turns into constantly trading odd man breaks

reply

Canada had the edge in 3-3.

Makar lost a 50-50 puck chip at the USA blue line and McDavid had two great chances to end it but came up short

Canada just got Goalie’d today and that was the difference

reply
47 sats \ 0 replies \ @HardMoney 3h

Agreed, 3vs3 just is more random and coin flippy in general tho

reply

Yeah I agree with this. But Canada had chances McDavid fanned on a shot then did a power move to the net that got washed out.

reply
212 sats \ 1 reply \ @JesseJames 3h

Agree, they had ton of chances to put us away early... I guess it was not in the stars :-) (and stripes...lol)

reply

Not today!

reply
55 sats \ 1 reply \ @siggy47 4h

Good. I feel better. It sucks not being able to watch.

reply

It was a fantastic game. So much speed and skill. Hitting and guys getting after it!

reply

Those three-on-one break aways gotta be stressful. Talk about putting your team on your back.

reply