stormboy

:thumbup: someone on facebook whom i don't really know that well but seems to be a diehard wings fan actually typed "lindstrom" the other day...seriously!!!! WTF!!! it annoys me when people can't spell filppula, but he hasn't been around that long and it's a weird name. but for f***'s sake, this guys been our captain for how many seasons now, and has been one of the best d-men in the league for a really long time...and has been a wing his entire career! there is NO REASON for ANYONE to think that his name is spelled or pronounced "lindstrom."

i've tried this and there's always a few-second delay between the feeds. maybe it won't be the case for you, but it works almost well enough to watch...but not quite.

um, no it won't. the only message it will send is that people aren't watching hockey, which is the opposite of what we want. it will not be seen as a measurable protest against anything. it will just be seen as people not caring about hockey. no, it will just prevent us from watching our beloved wings. GREAT idea please. homer, much? um, no, it doesn't make sense. KTHXBAI!

will it never end?

i hope he was drunk.

*sigh* i grow weary of this. after team x's loss-- team x's fan: WE LOST CUZ DA REFS! team y's fan: BAD CALLS GO BOTH WAYS CAN'T YOU ADMIT U GOT OUTPLAYED!!!1!!11 after team y's loss-- team y's fan: WE LOST CUZ DA REFS!!! team x's fan: BAD CALLS GO BOTH WAYS CAN'T YOU ADMIT U GOT OUTPLAYED!!!1!!11 oh well. back on topic, i'm still going to have to say 87. zetterberg has done a masterful job of shutting him down so far, but the few times he's been away from zetts out there he has looked real dangerous, and has still had some chances against zetterberg. all it takes is two extended shifts with crosby out there w/o zetterberg and something bad will happen.

yep, let's go with that. expect the wings to come out flying tomorrow night.

him and z went at it...z dished out a few with gloves on...let 'em f***in' play. if malkin's out over some technicality, it will give pens fans a reason to *****. let him play, and let's beat 'em anyway, IMO. all the sweeter if they can't ***** about reffing, the league, etc. f*** 'em.

+1

that video gives me goose bumps. amazing.

lol feds had two good seasons. wish him the best.

i live in MI, so i get all reg.seas games on FSN. i can get VS not being everywhere and NBC playing one game a week...but you'd think once we got to the conference finals it would be worth televising. people like watching sports. why can't the NHL be one of them?

yeah, i mean, it's just like all fans. first, some people are just sore ******* losers. they can't say, "well, we were outplayed," they have to cross their arms and pout and point fingers because they can't accept defeat. second, a lot of people (myself included) lose control of their emotions when s*** goes down. your team gets embarassed and you're just pissed off. on LGW after a blowout loss you'll see a ton of "ZOMG FIRST ROUND EXIT FIRE OZZIE FIRE BABS TRADE OUR TEAM FOR THE GRIFFINS" kind of crap sprinkled with a few "well, one tough loss, let's get ready for next game" posts. lastly, the people who are the most extreme (eg the poster that OP quoted) are also the loudest. *shrug*

wait, this is every game.

THIS. i too am frustrated when calls go the wrong way. i think the problems with officiating bother me as much as the next guy, but suggestions of a conspiracy are ridiculous, on either (or any) side. the real problem, as i see it, is that the league opens itself up to these kinds of discussions, which take the focus off the game and off the players and on to the refs--the last place where attention should be. it's gotten to the point where after every loss, every fan believes the refs are against their team. it's getting pretty goddam annoying. s*** goes both ways. great teams find a way to win in spite of the adversity. hopefully, seeing other teams ***** about the reffing will give us better perspective about how every team's fans feels the way way do. wait, this is LGW...nevermind.

people just can't accept that we're better than them. it pisses people off that the wings are good year after year and so instead of giving us credit, they and their sour grapes have to find some other reason why the wings won rather than that they're the better team. i agree that the call was bad, and will continue to believe that until some explanation is given for it (i believe there may be a good reason why the refs called it, they're just not sharing--there also might be no good reason for it). but there have been bad calls both ways all playoffs. but, hey, we came back from a 3-0 deficit to tie the game. it was also one of the SIX goals we scored in the game. your team gave up a shortie. your goalies were bad and your d-men were worse. your goonery after going down a few goals prevented any possibility of a comeback--you conceded the game long before it was over. there's a lot of other s*** that you can deal with other than one weak call. we've had a late-stages game-tying goal illegitimately waived off and a player illegitimately ejected early in a game. we're up 3-1 in the WCF with the series going back home. you can overcome adversity...if you know how to f*king coach.

yeah. if i were the coach of a team that will more than likely appear in back-to-back stanley cups with the chance of winning them both, i'd sure has hell want to leave town.

unless you can clone one or more of datsyuk, zetterberg, hossa, filppula, cleary, plus franzen, helm, hudler, and even sammy, you're occasionally going to get some players that have a pretty one- or two-dimensional game. homer is one of those, admittedly, but is great at his couple dimensions. yesterday, a young, hungry team beat us on their home ice. nothing wrong with that. today, without two of our top four players, we beat them 6-1. are you now saying, "ZOMG WHERE WAS HOMER ON THAT PPG f*** WE SHOULD HAVE WON 10-0 IT'S ALL HOMER'S FAULT WE GOT SCORED ON AND DIDN'T SCORE FOUR MORE GOALS OMGWTFBBQ!!!!1!!!11ONE!!!!1ELEVEN!!"? i mean, look, if one small part of homer's game was solely responsible for the entire game three loss, then he must clearly be the defining characteristic of our team. which means that despite his zero points today, by your own logic, jake ryan, holmstrom is responsible for this win. i'm sure he'll be flattered.

if hal gill is defending the red wings, it's hard to argue with that. i think he'd take any chance he could get to denigrate the wings, and could not do so here.

oh, and by the way, please stop with the ninety-SUX s***. if you want to comment about his passing or his defensive play, that's legit. also realize that he's a 2.25million-per-year player that adds two (generally) important elements to this team: 1. net presence. it seems to be fairly common knowledge that homer is one of the top-two if not the best front-of-the-net players in the game. his tap-in goals, garbage goals, and perhaps most importantly, screens, are invaluable. thus, he helps the wings out a great deal on many individual plays. 2. example. related to the first point, homer takes more abuse than probably 99% of players in the NHL right now. and he just keeps coming back for more. while that in and of itself is admirable, it's hard to believe that it doesn't inspire the team. it's hard to play a lackadaisical powerplay when homer's standing in front of the net having the living hell kicked out of him. i'm not saying that that means every player is perfect all the time because of homer's play, but it's one important ingredient in four stanley cup-winning teams.

i think it's fair to say that homer had some responsibility on the play for not getting back. but look, it's no surprise to anyone that homer isn't a great 2-way forward, and that hasn't really stopped us in the past. like others have said, bad series of events for the wings. and let's give credit where credit is due. sharp was in perfect position at the perfect time and pahlsson's tap-pass was excellent, especially considering his body position on the play. the hawks capitalized amazingly on a bad plays + a degree of bad luck by the wings, and deserved to win the game. homer's being out of position on the last goal was one of many factors in that goal being scored; it was not the only factor by a damn sight; he also played an important role in two of our goals after the wings as a team went down 3-0.

just got to this thread...thought i'd play a little catch-up. basically, yes. you might say, "they delivered a big hit--time for us to play really physical as well." but i think that when something unfortunate happens, you don't have to blame the other team. a few years ago, j-willy got smoked by i believe raffi torres who was then with the oilers. that was the times that willy ended up laying unconscious in the corner with a blood trail on the ice leading to where he lay. it was a clean it; williams had his head down and payed for it. obviously torres didn't want to injure willy, just deliver a really solid body check. these things happen, and i don't think anyone in the red wings organization was calling torres "gutless" or making s*** up about the play. they were like, "too bad; clean hit; keep your head up." you, sir, win 1000 internets. + crodley, great response IMO. njf, i think i understand your point and you are correct that by the letter of the law, it was technically interference. (which, in that case, should have been 2min kronner 2min buff for roughing and no misconduct.) but i think the second bolded part of cordley's response makes a lot of sense. since they can say "technically" he hadn't touched the puck, it was interference...as if the refs in real time could tell that the puck was 1.5 inches away from his skates. so many times you see similar plays where the puck is right around somebody and contact is made with no attendant penalty call. is havlat isn't hurt on the play, no chance a 2min minor is called. if the puck was 1.5 inches away from a wing skate or stick and a hawk makes a hit and is called for it, the hawks would be incensed, and rightly so, IMO. [tangentially, thanks for expressing differing views without the normally resulting flamewar] it's not surprising, but that doesn't mean that it is inappropriate and wrong-headed. unrelatedly, what is the actual reason for assessing a major penalty for interference. as i understand it, interference is hitting someone when they don't have the puck. you can get interference for basically setting a pick, so there's no question about how hard the contact is to determine interference. logically, it seems like an extension of the normal interference penalty would be playing someone's body when they're really far away from the puck, not playing their body with more force. 2min boarding: hitting someone's numbers, sending them crashing into the board. 5min boarding: hitting someone's numbers really forcefully and dangerously, sending them crashing in to the boards. 2min interference: hitting someone when the don't have the puck. 5min interference: hitting someone when they really don't have the puck. obviously i'm misunderstanding something.

none of them will score until game three, at which time it will be hossa.

i lol'd.