hooon

Honestly, amidst all of the s***-awful reffing in that game, those delay of game mishaps went completely unnoticed by me. I haven't watched them in replay but I'll take your word for it. As far as I'm concerned, I don't mind that not being reviewable... for the most part, its an easy call and at least they get all 4 dudes together to make the decision. But the rest of the reffing....

Very cool. Isn't Tampa the same team who tried the female goalie in the early 90s?

Yes! Its wonderful!

They also named it the Mark Messier Leadership Award. The names aren't always the most appropriate, but what can ya do?

I'm just not convinced that Modano's 1.4 games of solid play recently have earned a spot on the 2nd line with Pavs.

Hmm... maybe the switch is on a dimmer? Or the clap-on system? Something doesn't seem to be right here...

Brouwer, Bickell, Kane, Scott, Seabrook, Campbell, Dowell, Campoli, Pisani, Johnson... seem pretty stacked with potential chirpers if you ask me. They've been known for a while now to be a bunch of s*** talkers. Nothing wrong with that for the most part, but they could show a little class when a guy is clearly injured and bleeding. Its one thing to chirp on the ice, but when you are completely protected behind your own bench and know nothing can happen, its pretty cowardly to get your insults in there as a guy skates past bleeding.

So close yet so far. Friday, April 1 Philadelphia at New Jersey Chicago at Columbus Calgary at St. Louis Colorado at Phoenix Saturday, April 2 Atlanta at Boston X 2 Tampa Bay at Minnesota Detroit at Nashville Dallas at Los Angeles Montreal at New Jersey Carolina at NY Islanders Toronto at Ottawa Buffalo at Washington Pittsburgh at Florida Edmonton at Vancouver Anaheim at San Jose Sunday, April 3 NY Rangers at Philadelphia Minnesota at Detroit Buffalo at Carolina St. Louis at Columbus Tampa Bay at Chicago Calgary at Colorado Dallas at Anaheim

I like Mmamolo's lines as well. I'm still kind of confused as to why the Hudler-Pavs-Cleary line was ever broken up in the first place.

LMAO, thats a great one.

It was also largely due to the fact that we had run out of options with Howard. We couldn't keep him GR anymore and didn't want to waste him on free agency or waivers. They pretty much had no choice but to go with Ozzie/Howie last year. At that point in time a lot of us here (me included) were bummed and skeptical about Howie as the backup, but proved a lot of us wrong by winning the starting job last year and having a great season. Conks was a good backup, but I can't say I miss him terribly in the great scheme of things.

I agree, I want Helm to tear it up tonight like he has been.

Why isn't E battling for a spot?

I miss Pavs, but honestly at this point I'd rather him get the rest. As others have mentioned... assuming we still get the win!!! LGW P.S. pleeeease Mule, go into beast mode already!

LGW!!!! I'll be watching this game TJ Oshie style - 3 sheets to the wind!

If Turco was your backup... would you start him?

The last few posts kind of nailed it, but what I want to see is an established consistency to the rules and how they are called. The rules are soo subjective and as such are interpreted completely differently in every game. What is a penalty on one play will be let go on another, and it never ends. The rules need to be black and white, and either called or not called CONSISTENTLY. It has nothing to do with whether its on the Wings or not, frankly I get embarrassed if a terrible call goes in our favor. I want to see the sport of hockey being played as it should... by the players. The refs are there to keep it in line and the make the calls as they appear in the rulebook, not to interpret the rules based on situation and control the play or outcome of a game. In terms of review, the system just needs to be improved. Every goal is supposed to be reviewable, and yet the the Brad May debacle still occurred last year because of a fundamentally flawed system and chain of command. I don't want every darn play to be reviewed such as penalties or offsides, but goal reviews are basic and that should include goals that are cancelled based on interference. I don't see how this would add 30 minutes to a game. At most it would add about 3 to 5 minutes, which is a price I would gladly pay for improved quality in officiating. The whole thing where the "war room" reviews the play, then talks to the ref on the phone seems really counter-intuitive. In the NFL, the actual ref watches the review and makes a call based on that. I'm not sure how that could be applied to the NHL, but there always seems to be error in the communication between Toronto and the on ice refs. I don't even need to mention that the whole "intent to blow the whistle" thing as the absolutely dumbest rule in hockey. I like the idea of the overhead ref TBH, because it is easier to see the calls from a fan's POV. This is a drastic change though and I don't see it happening. It also isn't necessary when so many little things could be improved first.

Why does everyone say that a game will be 3 hours longer if the officiating is fixed? That's such an overreaction to a very modest statement. Nowhere did I say that every single play should be reviewable, so please don't put words in my mouth to make my comments sound absurd. All I said was that the replay system as it is now is very flawed. There is a very vague line as to what is reviewable, and what isn't. It is so flawed that sometimes simple plays take 10 minutes to review, instead of 30 seconds. Fixing the review system should make it faster, not longer. I never said every single play should be reviewable. Ref homers like you love to jump to the argument that games will be hours longer if the review system is fixed, which is ridiculous. If anything, review improvements will speed up the game while also functioning as it should - to get the call correct.

Look, I'm sure being a ref is hard and all, but being that this is the NATIONAL HOCKEY LEAGUE, I don't see why it is unreasonable to demand more perfection at the highest level of hockey in the world. If this is as good as the reffing can possibly get, then that would be very pathetic indeed. No one is denying that it is a difficult job and that mistakes can happen, but what drives us crazy is how absolutely fixable so many facets of the officiating are. So many simple tweaks and changes could vastly improve the reffing and subsequent complaining about the reffing. The replay system, overall consistency, subjectivity of the rules, interpretation of the rules, players understanding of the rules, intent calls, headshots, etc. The reffing is different in every single game, for every single team, for every single player, and it simply makes no sense. That the league has an anti-honesty policy in regards to coaches and players voicing their opinions about the officiating speaks volumes to me.

Take your own blinders off, you have been a Bert hater for as long as I've been here.

I'm pretty sure that 2nd line has been consistently terrible for them.

Lol, awesome.

And if I'm the Wings, I do not want to play the Hawks in the first round. Just finish them off, boys!

So pumped for this one. Even with some key guys out I really think we can beat them. They are desperate for a spot though, so the Wings better not take them lightly. Three games left against the Hawks, the Wings seriously could make or break weather they get a playoff spot or not.