djt813

Elbows and other evidence of players playing hard happen every few minutes. Elbows like Malkin's on Franzen most certainly do not happen every few minutes in hockey. "Running from behind" is overboard for describing the contact. Bump, fall to well padded knees, stand up. Happens all the time, and not that unfrequently to goalies. If you want two plays we could more reasonably compare and disagree about, perhaps Maltby's game 3 or 4 slash on Crosby versus Crosby's game 5 slash on Zetterberg?

Uhh, I solidified none of your point with that response. I was hoping to solicit a more comparable comparison of events. When a player hits with an elbow, it's an elbow. When someone bumps into the goalie, it is a bump. I agree that fans of a team almost invariably will have a different perspective on the same play. But I restate with objective conviction, certain to be shared by a neutral observer, that the elbow to Franzen's head was high and hard and Hossa's bump on Garon knocked him off his feet but didn't come anywhere close to dislodging his jaw from his skull. To argue that is to display the very epitomy of the bias you have been talking about.

Comparing a BUMP on Garon to a vicious elbow to the head of Franzen seems to be taking a bit of creative liberty...

No cheering from me, unless "Jesus, Hoss, did we really need to do that in a game where the Penguins don't need any more excuses for cheap shotting us?" I was less than impressed and have no idea what he was thinking!

Whole hearted agreement. It's pretty pitiful. I know as a Wings fan I'm a bit biased, but it certainly seems to happen around the other team's net much, much more than around ours...

Crosby doesn't suck, so can't say as I was a big fan of the chant. I guess it did give him something to pout bigger about in the box while justice was served for his behavior. But "Crosby is a punk/hack/goon" might have been appropriate?

I'm gonna borrow Bab's lucky McGill tie!

I think so, but primarily on merit of stickhandling and puck possession. There have been others that have had amazing vision and understanding of the game. Plenty with better shots. Many that can pass as well. I have to say I think he is hands down the best stick handler of all time. Granted there is little footage before 1970 or so, but can't imagine anyone else making top tier, HOF defensemen look like rookies while he is standing still or barely moving. Creativity and execution with the puck, yes, one of a kind. I'd have to think a bit more about it, but he may be the best backchecking puck stealer too?

Cheap shot? Definitely. Cheapest ever? Possible. Strongly competitive is Gary Robert's elbow to Franzen's head last year in his first game returned from concussion. How come you don't see us dishing out cheap shots like that, but we sure take a lot? Makes you wonder if the league doesn't like skilled & well-behaved players?

I definitely like our chances of winning in their building far more than the converse. I don't expect it to be easy. After that meltdown, I would hope that Crosby & Malkin decide to be quality leaders of their team and have a good game. And I hope that is not enough, that the power of Dats, Z, Hoss, Mule, Liddy, Raf, Kronner, etc is just way too much for anyone to handle. I think our boys will play their best road game of the series, far surpassing game 3 that they played well enough to win if not for poor special teams and poor calls putting them in those special teams situations. I just get a feeling that Hossa is working his bum off, and while it hasn't resulted in a huge offensive outburst, he sure has got us a lot of puck control, shots, and chances. I think he'll finally break through in whatever game we win, be it 6 or 7. Think Ozzie will be focused and ready. Dats was great at whatever health level he was at yesterday. A little rusty out of the gate but he brushed that off quickly and was a major factor. He should be even better with a few more days rest. I wouldn't be surprised if we see Pav & Hank split lines to get better coverage of 87 & 71 without the last change. I'm looking forward to a great game and really think we can close it out in Pittsburgh on Tuesday!

Interesting parallel between games 1, 2, and 5. Detroit lead & Pittsburgh becomes a bunch of dirty punks throwing cheap shots and wicked slashes. What a bunch of classy guys. I can see why Bettman wants Crosby & Malkin to be the face of the league! Games 3 and 4, interestingly, have no cheap shots or bitter penalties just because we were getting beat. Thankfully the refs did a little more to step up and control the violence, keeping our players from getting hurt by a bunch of petulant children.

I think Calgary a couple years ago takes the prize - was it Billington that went in for 20 seconds just to two-hand Franzen across the chest?

I second that... especially if going after people in beer league when everyone has to work the next day... good grief!

Bettman shot was classic. "This is the face of our league!?!"

I guess I was pointing out the blade vs the top of the stick because it wasn't follow through of Ozzie swinging his stick that caused the shot to the head. It was truly Staal skating into the top of the stick held (relatively!) still on the forecheck. Goalies hold their sticks with just the one hand in the middle, so the top sticks up where the contact was made. But the contact was not caused by wildly swinging or a follow through of a shooting motion. It's happened to lots of players (ours included) and is pretty much the danger/cost of trying to be aggressive on the forecheck. EDIT - Also, the rule states the stick is carried over the opponents shoulder - an action bringing your stick up to the level of the face. If Ozzie had lifted even the top shaft part with the intention of hitting Staal I would buy your argument. But he just brush the puck along away from the next and never lifted his stick above his knees much less shoulders.

Without Datsyuk - or for that matter Zetterberg or perhaps Hossa - we are competitive. That's where the depth comes in. We're no longer obviously better. With our top guns we are obviously better. Look forward to some rest and a better effort in game 5, as they certainly didn't bring it last night. Yes, win is a win and loss is a loss. Pitt should have and did win game 4. They did not earn game 3 on their merits alone.

Not even remotely the most blatant non calls - that is reserved for Crosby's cross check to Zetterberg's head in game 1, Kunitz's cross check to Franzen's head in game 2 or 3, and the too many men on the ice. All three are quite obviously more blatant than debating what is or is not a pick. Not that I am arguing whether they were picks, I think you are fairly calling it out. I agree we have gotten away with some picks. But they have happenned in the Pittsburgh end also. There is no significant pick advantage for Detroit, both teams are picking as much as the refs will let them get away with. To say that may have cost Pittsburgh game 2 is unfair. The too many men did lead to a goal, as the Pens got a power play a minute later upon which they scored. They should have been killing a penalty, not scoring on the PP. Agree all four could have gone either way. Game 1 & 2 obviously could have. I think we played better, but not remotely one sided or enough to keep a couple breaks from having turned the outcome. Game 3 I thought was more in our favor for longer stretches and definitely could have gone (or should have gone) the other way. Game 4 maybe could have gone another way, but agree with you that it was the most one sided game of the series and was pretty well in Pittsburgh's pocket from mid-second period on. As for the Staal "rationalization" - well that's just ridiculous. A high stick requires the blade of the stick to be up high hitting him in the face. Ozzie's blace was below his shins. Staal was trying to get around Ozzie while playing the puck and the top of the shaft of the stick hit him in the face. No high stick cuz the stick ain't high.

Point taken. I do realize everyone gets good and bad calls. I don't think any team is intentionally jobbed. I am not normally one to whine endlessly about officiating. I know we get away with some uncalled penalties, I know we benefit from some weak and blown calls on the opposition. Usually it balances out. But this year has not been balanced - all the big blown calls seem to line up squarely on the other side of the fence. I'm not sure quick whistles on Osgood are enough to scream bloody murder over - is it really comparable to 30 seconds of 6 attackers and getting slammed with a PP goal against? Maybe, I don't really know. I don't see the whistles as quick - but I realize my glasses are a bit red and yours are a bit yellow and we frequesntly will not interpret the same play the same way. Glad to see there are passionate Pens fans that can have good discussion - as opposed to some fans that visit other teams boards just to talk trash and drop expletive laden wishes. Hope Wings fans are behaving similarly well on your forums.

If high stick on Staal is the best you can come up with - keep trying. Staal's bloody nose came from him running into the top end of Ozzie's goalie stick. Not a high stick, just Staal forechecking and running into it. No penalty. Have another suggestion? Any team, even Detroit and its depth, will miss the best defensive forward in the game and one of the best offensive players. Especially deep in the playoffs. Whether we can win without him or not - I think we can, but it brings us down closer to other teams skill level. It is a definitive yes we can win when he is in the lineup - no one can hang with the Wings full roster.

Right on. If that is just luck then so are half of the goals in hockey. He followed the play while Staal (I think it was Jordan) didn't have a clue where it went. And he buried it. The game 2 Abdelkader goal was a good bit of luck, but it happens. God knows we've sufferred several bad goals.

Superior and dominate are two completely different concepts. Superior means they were better. That simple. As you said they deserved the wins in games 1 & 2. They were better. I'll stick with that term rather than saying superior. Game 3 the Wings were better in the first, dominated the second, and the Pens were better in the third. Pens did not dominate the third the way Detroit dominated the second. That adds up to the Wings definitely being the better team. Especially when overcoming some lopsided refereeing that made the Wings job tougher and gave some pretty good breaks to Pitt. I have yet to hear a constructive objection to the refereeing injustice of game 3. I can only imagine how Pitt fans would whine if we had 6 men on the ice for 30 seconds and then got a powerplay goal while we should have been killing off our too-many-men penalty, topped off by a game winning PP goal on interference call that was let go many times throughout the game. The Pens have been the better team part of the series. I would put it at 35-40% of the series. Not half. Not even after game 4 in which they had a huge 6 minute stretch in the second period that blew the game up. The Wings still managed to carry the play for good portions of the game, if rather ineffectively on the scoreboard. By the way, Fleury is by far the Pitt MVP in the last two games. Without his stellar goaltending it would have been very different games. He has really stepped up and is quite impressive. Although I suppose there is an element of that to Osgood's role in games 1 and 2. The "we're better but we lost game three" is neither show business, BS, nor unjustified. Simply an honest evaluation of the factors that led to the outcome. Notice I didn't make that argument for game 4. And I haven't whined about the refs blown offsides call on the Pens first goal in the overall outcome - even though subtracting that and the empty netter would leave us tied 2-2! I just didn't think we had the jump & desire, it was obvious Pens were hungrier for game 4 victory.

If it is just a whiner sob story, they why were you unable to refute a single point in the argument? Yes, the Wings have been superior team 3 of the 4 games. They did not dominate, and were not superior at every point in the game. But they did play better in games 1-3. Take game 3 for example - Det outplayed Pit fairly well in the first, Pitt turned tables and carried play in the third pretty well, those periods wash, but Det DOMINATED the second. Net result = Det outplayed Pit in the game. One shorty does not establish a trend. I'll take all the powerplays I can get as we score on about a quarter of them and have given up one shorty in the entire playoffs. And you might understand Detroit frustration in the playoffs considering we've been on the short end of most major calls since Anaheim series. Having a valid tying goal with 40 seconds left waived off by a ref who is out of position. Same game's winning goal scored on an Ana PP where Stuart was called for interference for checking a player that had CLEARLY just played the puck. Already being down Lidstrom in the lineup against Chi and having Kronwall called for a major for interference and being kicked out of the game. And I have yet to hear one person of the opinion it was even a minor penalty. Malkin going after Zetterberg at the end of game 2, getting a very appropriate instigator, only to see the league construct a nice sounding explanation to cover their marketing decision to keep Malkin in for game 3. Sorry, but it was not the heat of the moment, Malkin deliberately sought out Z to pummel him - Z didn't do anything that Malkin was responding to. And those are only the biggest highlights, there have been more (admittedly at some point it gets down to nitpicking every little play). Yes, Pittsburgh has played hard. And they completely deserved to win game 4 last night. We made some terrible errors that they capitalized on. Uncharacteristic, but very stupid mistakes. [by the way, Pitt first goal was scored on an offsides play clearly shown by Eddie O on the Vs broadcast last night - another in the string of us on the short end of the calls.] I can admit when we don't deserve to win, and despite outshooting Pitt we were not the better team. Last night. The previous games, I think we were... but alas it is tied up and now the best of 3. Good luck to the Pens & I hope we can have consistent, fair refereeing for both sides.

Wow, displaying an astounding lack of hockey knowledge. Playing a superior game and losing is very possible in hockey. It's all about getting breaks. Pittsburgh's game 3 breaks came in the form of horrible zebra calls. Ignoring nearly half a minute of 6 men on the ice, 4 of them continuously cycling the puck down low in the offensive zone, is an absolutely unforgiveable mistake. Yes, refs are human and make mistakes, but that is well beyond the realm of acceptable error for 4 of the best NHL officials in the Stanley Cup finals. Then, the same laughable refs have the audacity to put us on the penalty kill when we should be enjoying a goal lead and man advantage, potentially making it a two goal advantage. Instead, the Pens get a disgustingly unfair powerplay and tie the game. Add to that Kunitz glaring cross check to Franzen's head that went suspiciously uncalled despite Franzen having just played the puck and the referees almost forced to see the penalty even if they were trying to ignore it. And finally, making a rather weak interference call on Erickson that Orpik and Gill had committed repeatedly throughout the first two periods without any repercussion in the third period was a heck of a lot to make the Wings overcome. Granted, our second period should have led to about 2-3 goals that made all of that not matter. But it is digusting to see such an inconsistent bunch of calls in favor of one team having a profound effect on the game. And now that game 4 is over, you would think time would make it hurt less. But the reality is we earned the win in game 3 if it weren't for referees deciding the game. And to lose tonight would have just been missing out on a sweep. As Penguins fans know very well between this year and last - there is a HUGE difference between 3-1 and 2-2 after game 4. Too bad this year isn't 3-1 like last year, and like the game 3 effort should have made it. Maybe it sounds petty and living a bit too much in the past. That could be true, but it is also a very justified evaluation of the series. Derek P.S. Not a fairweather or losing face - still say Wings in 6. We just need a little rest to get our legs under us and our spirit back. Wouldn't help to get our Hart Trophy candidate back. Wonder where the flightless birds would be without their Hart candidate?