djt813

Game 7 Pittsburgh 1st goal - offside play, as documented by NHL hired national broadcast crew. Game 7 Pittsburgh 2nd goal - one minute after horrific Hal Gill interference on dump in, not surprisingly not called. Detroit goal, well, no ref help on that one. Real score: Detroit 1, Pittsburgh 0, NHL League office/Refs/Gary Bettman 2. Sorry to see the league goals are chalked up on the Pitt side! Hate to be a bitter, homer fan, but the reality is that sometimes that is justified by the circumstances!

Agreed, much less measuring up to Ovechkin. Or Datsyuk... Sidney doesn't even play on the PP, don't you need to be great in both ends to be a great player?

Maybe you are more graceful than I, but I can't give them that much credit. Yes we got away with some calls. Just because we got more PP doesn't mean they didn't deserve more calls than they got. Yes, we didn't get the job done on the PP, or overall for that matter. But still no reason to substitute "Pitt accomplishment" for still impressive if slightly less respectable "capitalizing on opportunities given them". Better than us, I guess the score & Cup shows that to be true, but can't say as having watched the whole series that is the story of the games. We didn't do our jobs, I admit that and can't say we earned the win, but also can't say as we entirely blew it when there are so many calls. We just didn't overcome all the bad luck and create our own "luck" like we are capable of and should have done. Good season Wings, recharge and don't leave so much up to luck this year. Anyone notice that Bettman was beaming handing the Cup to Crosby this year, yet a bit uncomfortable and hesitant handing it to Lidstrom last year?

Agreed, very very sadly, agreed...

Who you routing for??? For one, questionable is quite a fair argument - as it seemed to me, biased as I am, that he lifted the stick which is not hooking at all. And we got another goal and won by 2. All of my examples were goals that were directly part of winning or losing, not when there was some padding in the score... fair enough?

You are right, it doesn't change who everyone in history will recognize as the cup winners in 09. But this is a RED WINGS FAN BOARD where we should be able to vent the injustice of the process without our own fans slamming us. All I want is an impartial league to let the players decide it and hold those players to the rules the league itself has established!

True dat, one of many many. Some in our favor, vastly more against...

Yeah, we got the breaks in game 1 & 2. Still haven't seen the rule about covering on the goalie's back, regardless of the vertical level of the crease. But how many posts did we hit in game 6 & 7. MAF came up huge and stopped just enough to help his team out. We didn't win just by skill and them just by luck. But we definitely did get the short end of completely unarguably blown calls. I just wish our guys played up to their potential and it didn't matter... then no one could keep us off Lord Stanley's Cup this year.

Still can't wait for all the Ozzie haters to STFU. Yes the Wings are a great team, but how many goalies can come up with huge saves after sitting bored for 7-11 minutes of game time. He has HHOF numbers, no argument, and the Stanley hardward to prove it all means something. He's in, and if they try to do otherwise, well, I guess it wouldn't surprise me after the way this series went!

Hossa didn't rack up the goals, or points for that matter, in the finals. He didn't dominate every game. But there were several games where he was a force, just didn't manage to score. We've had plenty of players in our past like that. He scored 40 in the reg season. He had his bright spots in the playoffs getting us where we got. He is a hard working back checking responsible forward that is always dangerous in the other zone. If we can fit him in the salary cap structure, I would gladly welcome him back next year. Who do you think will be hungrier than Hossa?

I welcome any Pittsburgh apologist to come up with anywhere near the number of shafts we got, especially those leading to goals...

I have yet to see the rule book state that he can't cover the puck on the goalie's back. No one could come up with a solid case against that. And the game 2 "cover" was not on camera, but quite possibly shuffling the puck under Osgood which is not a penalty. Can't say as I agree that the calls were just barely in Pitt's favor. That said, yes, we did not win games 1 & 2 by that much. Do tip my hat to their grit and desire, just wish the cards weren't stacked against us a bit more than is fair in a series.

Absolutely, agreed the Pens capitalized on what they were handed. But to say that is justified cause for awarding the Cup, as compared to earning it without calls to capitalize on, seems a bit of a joke? Yes, agree Pens should have been awarded a goal for Wings hold with an empty net, but don't recall that non-call having changed the outcome of the game??? Hard to compare that "injustice" with those that actually factored in changing the outcome of a game... And finally, I am not happy about previous rounds officiating. The Hossa goal call was ridiculous, as was Anaheim's PP game winner on an "interference" call on Stuart when Drew Miller obviously played the puck. And Kronwall's "5 min major interference & game misconduct" for which I have never heard one person, including Bettman, even agree it deserved a minor penalty call. The ref'ing was crap, we normally can overcome it, and apparently couldn't this year. We need more hunger and perhaps more rest. Still appreciate our boys effort, just wish they got a fair shake...

Not really, they were good enough to win with the breaks, but we were good enough to have earned the win otherwise... it's not whining to point out very obvious calls leading directly to their win. We were the better team tonight, Fleury played amazing, and we got no bounces. They capitalized on plays that never should have happened according to the rules. So yes, kudos for them for burying the puck, but shame on the refs for playing such a gross hand in the outcome.

Have to agree, there was way too much injury this year. Most teams would have bowed out a long time ago from the quality losses we suffered. I think they played pretty hard considering what I am GUESSING to be some terrible injuries to fight through.

You may have a very good point. I thing I defended them for a while, but the reality they didn't step up much. There was way way way too much 3rd & 4th line scoring and not enough big names making big plays. Still won't chalk all our loss up to our failures with so many horrific calls leading directly to Pens goals, but we definitely didn't overcome the calls like we did in Ducks & Hawks series. Overall good season & would have liked to see what we could do with some justice in the calls each way... we'll be back next year, as we always are!

Same here. Excellent post. Further agreed, no more can we blame Erickson for blocking a pass and then letting Staal get the rebound. Overall team wasn't hungry enough, Pitt wanted it more, and we didn't get a bounce or a call in our favor.

Refs aren't the ONLY reason, but they definitely rank up there amongst the reasons...

Sadly you are right, only the score will be remember, not whether it was earned... and that just hurts more I think. Remember game 3, we suffer 30 seconds of 6 on 5 play, refs see it & don't bother calling, then have the audacity to call us for a penalty 1 min later upon which Pit scores tying goal. Then call us for a weak interference in 3rd per for the same thing Hal Gill did all series long, upon which Pit scores winning goal. And Malkin racks up 3 assists in a game he rightfully should have been suspended from playing. Makes you wonder why so many things have gone Pitt's way in this series???? What happened to "it all balances out in a series"???? Yes bitter, not letting it go, but also not gonna give Pitt more credit than they are due. They wanted it and cashed in on opportunities, but more often handed the opportunities by zebras than by our mistakes - with the obvious exception of our game 4 meltdown.

I think it must be Ozzie or Z. Mule & Lidstrom have enough stature to win it, but haven't been the most dominant players controlling game outcomes. Cleary & Helm are not prominent enough players. Not saying they don't deserve it, not by any means. But with Malkin & Crosby scoring up a storm in the first three rounds, I'm scared one of them is still a candidate in a series loss... and that would be a painful slam to the Wings, having a temper-tantrum child stealing our Conn Smythe trophy!

I think it's jealousy on their part that they can't play the Wings style of hockey. How is playing Wings style of hockey a bad thing? They are supremely skilled, totally professional, and win consistently. They play exciting offense and stifling defense. What is preferable, the New Jersey trap?

No, not really thinking you buy either side's take... more enjoying starting a conversation and keeping it boiling! I totally, 100% agree that difference viewpoints yield different interpretations - look at Pens board blaming 80% on referees stealing their mojo in game 5. I just argue how much skewing is reasonable. No idea how to stop it, but wish it was a tad less. And I'm guilty of skewing more than I would like to once in a while! At least a lot of people have passion. In this economy, I think we all need something nicer to think about than our houses and jobs.

I'll agree on most points - with the exception of stickhandling. Federov was supremely talented at it, could skate like a tornado through and around people holding the puck. He definitely can keep up with Pav in that regard. But nobody, and I mean nobody, can do the creative puck wizardry that Pav has displayed since his rookie year. Dragging it back and forth and back and forth through a defensemen's legs, making him dizzy... then getting knocked off the puck by second defender for not moving his feet! LOL. He's gotten a TON better about that since year one and two. But the sheer creativity, coordination, and execution to make people look silly... I love Federov and probably agree about him being the most dominant and complete player, but can't say as his stickhandling was on par with Pav. Can't say anyone's is! Isn't this a fun topic to tee off on... how blessed are we to have so many fan-freaking-tastic players to cheer on over the nearly two decades of high caliber hockey!

Ugh, it's that kinda crap I can't stand. An elbow to the head only sends the message that you are frustrated. Doesn't accomplish anything on the ice other than put your team in the box for even more PK time. At least agaist a veteran, experienced team like the Red Wings. Maybe younger teams are affected and intimidated by the "message" an elbow sends? Regardless, the best way to send a message and blow off some frustration is to score, play better defense, be more disciplines, and win the game. It's laughable that an elbow is argued to perhaps be more classy out of petulant frustration that it might be if unintentional in the midst of fighting for the puck and a good scoring chance!