Stevie4Pres

My wife and I got our engagement photos in Red Wings gear. She refused to watch most of the games in 09-10 because she was finishing her last year of nursing school and said she couldn't afford to be emotionally distracted. She's almost too emotionally involved because it gets to the point where she doesn't even want to watch if its an important game and the Wings aren't dominating. It's fantastic

BOS/PHI:4-3 PIT/MON:4-2 CHI/VAN:4-2 DET/SJ:4-3

SJS/COL 4-1 CHI/NSH 4-1 VAN/LAK 4-3 PHX/DET 2-4 WAS/MTL 4-1 NJD/PHI 4-2 BUF/BOS 3-4 PIT/OTT 4-3 Western Conference Winner: Chicago Eastern Conference Winner: Washington Stanley Cup Finals Winner: Washington

I will be in Paris as the Wings take to the ice in Sweden and I was wondering if the game will be covered by any European sports channels. My internet access is quite limited so I don't know if I'll be able to watch online or not. Any help would be greatly appreciated. Thanks in advance!!!

Look at it this way. If the Wings were tired or lacked "hunger" then maybe this year will be motivation for next year. I'm sure the Wings feel as if they let this one slip away and next year they'll be ready to do everything possible to not have to feel this kind of disappointment ever again. I haven't heard it mentioned yet but Babcock is now 0-2 in SCF game 7's. That has to be a bitter pill to swallow. He is two games short of 2 cups. That's tough...

Pens definitely deserved those last two games. Great series and great season. Hopefully we'll back next year.

I was listening to some sports radio show today that mainly talks about basketball and football. One of the promos said something along these lines. "People call up asking why we don't talk more about Hockey, The French Open and Women's golf. We reply 'There, we just did'". It's no wonder the NHL has trouble marketing itself when non-hockey fans put it on the same level as tennis and women's golf. I doesn't bother me because I know how great hockey is. If it was popular I would have to listen to every idiot with a pulse try and give their opinion (kind of like I'm doing now ).

Let me try to understand this correctly. A non-american who "doesn't care who wins" is watching two American teams compete for the Stanley Cup and actively searching Red Wing message boards to try and incite flame wars? That is just about the most pathetic thing I've ever heard. Get a life dude.

I totally agree that the refs blew that call. It was blatantly obvious and it sucks but I don't think that it was some sort of Bettman/NHL/referee conspiracy nonsense. It was just a terrible non-call and it happens both ways.

All the penalties on Detroit were their own fault. If there is a conspiracy it certainly wasn't evident in last nights game. 1) Cleary holding: Bonehead move by Cleary on an innocent play 2) Franzen tripping: His stick got tied up in the guy's feet. It wasn't intentional but the ref has to call it. 3) Ericsson interference: Pitt never touched the puck, Ericsson got a little lazy and stepped into the guy. Obvious call, Ericsson's fault. Both teams got their non-calls. How 'bout we talk about the Red Wings inability to clear the zone and how Pitt's aggressive forecheck forced a lot of turnovers in our own end? They played desperation hockey and came out on top. This was essentially an elimination game for the pens (down 3-0 is near impossible to come back from, especially against a team like Detroit) so they threw everything they had at the Wings. No conspiracy. The refs were fine. Let's take the next game in Pittsburgh and come back to Detroit and win the cup on home ice!!!!

I'm not going to speculate about specific line combos but I think that he's referring to the fact that he will have to do a lot of changes on the fly. Considering the Pens will have the last change, he will have to put Z out against Crosby while play is going on. This causes lines to get somewhat jumbled. The Wings have been very good this year responding to different line combos.

I didn't see that cuz NBC would rather show stupid sidenote clips like "Team Leaders" than show the replay of what actually happened. If that is the case then you're right. I'll defer to you if you've seen clear video evidence of this.

Did Z cover the puck ON THE ICE? Cuz apparently that's what the rule states.

Nice catch. I completely missed that. I wonder if they think about changing the wording. As I understand it every other rule that applies to the goal crease extends the crease area upward, ie. interference (refer to numerous calls on Homer's ass in the crease).

I don't think it was a penalty because it didn't look like Z covered it. He initially put his hand over the puck but as Ozzie rolled over the puck came free from Z's grasp (as evident by the puck sliding away from Ozzie after the ref blew the whistle). Therefore, it was not Z that covered the puck but Ozzie. A player is allowed to shovel the puck away from the net from inside the crease aren't they? IMO this is why it was not a penalty shot. I do admit that there is a legitimate argument for a penalty shot and if that had happened to the Wings then I would probably be screaming for one also.