cprice12

This is completely wrong. Sorry. 1) You don't have to knock a guy down for it to be interference. 2) Petro was knocked down on the play anyway. 3) The puck wasn't that close...four or five feet away and Petro never touched it. 4) Helm made no effort to play the puck and checked Petro, preventing him from reaching the puck. Textbook interference.

Where are you reading that? stltoday.com? That place is a mess of idiocy. It's best not to read that place.

I only saw the replay of that once...and yes, it looked like to me like it should have been a penalty. Isn't that what discussion forums are for? Talking about the details of the game? Ummm...the power play the Wings got from that whole series of events led to their 3rd goal. Huge goal in the game. It most certainly was a big enough travesty to make an argument out of. It's the biggest gripe I have in the game. Probably should have been mathing minors for interference and roughing... and a 4 on 4 as result, not a Wings power play.

Oh, I'm sorry. Can we not discuss the game in the game day thread? Just calling them as I see them my friend. Sorry if that rubs you the wrong way. And it's a significant thing to bring up, since both instances I am referring to led to Red Wing power play goals. It directly effected the outcome of the game. So, yes, I'm annoyed by it...you guys would be if it were the other way around. I've seen plenty of bitching in here about the reffing over the years. If neither call or non-call led to anything on the scoreboard, it wouldn't be as much of an issue...but, unfortunately, that wasn't the case. But yes, as I said, the Red Wings were the better team overall in the game. The Blues owned the 1st and the Wings took the 2nd and 3rd periods. The Blues got less and less sustained pressure as the game went on. I'm surprised it was only a 2-1 game with a few minutes to go in the game. Goaltending was strong again, for both teams. And this game was a bit rougher than most Blues-Wings games. Kind of a throwback of sorts. Fun to watch anyway.

I didn't say it was ok. I just said he didn't sucker punch Howard. Settle down.

You can make that point on my first point...that's rule interpretation...so I'll give you that. But my 2nd point isn't debatable at all. So you wanna try to explain to me how it wasn't textbook interference? I'd love to hear it.

I agree that he went over there to start a fight. And he went a long way to do it. Which is probably why he got the penalty. But Stuart was very willing to go and dropped the gloves first instead of skating away or making Stewart drop them first. I just don't like that call as an instigator penalty. In most fights, one guy wants to go, gives the other guy a shot and they go. If Stewart goes over there gives him a shot and drops the gloves first and Stuart is forced to drop the gloves to defend himself, then yes, by all means Stewart gets the instigator. I fail to see why distance traveled should come into play IF both guys are willing participants and especially if the other guy drops his gloves first.

Just analyzed the replay. Petro didn't look like he made contact with Howard when he took a swing, if he did he just grazed his shoulder, maybe the side of his mask...but he wasn't sucker punched. And it looked like the puck came up, Howard had it on his chest, may have been fluttering a bit, Petro took a swing that goes over Howard's shoulder...maybe he's swinging at the puck trying to punch it in, not sure what he was doing because you lose sight of the puck from that camera angle. Honestly, if he wanted to sucker punch him, he could have easily done so. Either that, or he is a horrible fighter with terrible aim.

You've been here almost 2 months. I've been here almost 10 years. Good enough? K THANKS BYE.

To be fair, Helm SHOULD have gotten an interference penalty. Stuart's hit on Petro was a good hit, nothing illegal about it...but Stewart was right in defending his teammate. Helm's hit on Petro would have been good except for the fact Petro didn't have the puck on the last one. Carlo reacted poorly...either stand up for your teammate or don't...don't just put the guy in a headlock, what does that do? Howard didn't instigate the fight, but he got off easy with only 2 minutes. He was throwing punches at everyone. He should have gotten a lot more, but it didn't matter...game was over.

Overall Detroit was the better team tonight. They deserved to win. With that said...I had some issues with a couple things. Detroit's two power play goals probably shouldn't have happened...I'll explain. 1) I don't think Stewart should have gotten an instigator penalty. Yes, he approached Stuart and wanted to fight...that's obvious...but Stuart dropped his gloves first. Stuart was a willing participant. Stewart didn't drop his gloves and jump on Stuart. I disagreed with that call. You see fights start all of the time where one guy goes over to another guy and gives him a shot and says let's go, and the other guy agrees and the gloves come off. That's the way I saw this...Stewart just went a long way to fight Stuart. 2) Helm's hit on Pietrangelo late in the 3rd was textbook interference. Petro was skating for the puck and he seemed to be a good 5 or 6 feet from the puck, hadn't touched it yet, and Helm destroys him. If Petro would have had the puck, it would have been a great hit...but the only problem was he didn't have the puck. Assuming Carlo still retaliates, it should have been 2 minutes on Helm and 2 minutes on Carlo. It should have been 4 on 4 with 3 1/2 minutes left instead of a Detroit PP. My first point is debatable. I'm sure you can make a case that Stewart should have gotten the instigator and argue that...we could debate that all day since it comes down to rule interpretation. But I don't see the 2nd point being debatable at all. It's clearly interference on Helm, and just not called. Congrats on the win. Like I said, Detroit was the better team in this game. Maybe we can even up the season series on the next game in St. Louis...and hopefully we beat Pittsburgh tomorrow to get right back to within 1 pt. of the Wings.

The reason they have 6 OT losses is because they can't score in the shootout. For whatever flukey reason, they only have 2 shootout goals this year.

It's important to win the division, because whoever doesn't win the division between St. Louis, Detroit & Chicago, will end up playing each other in the first round in the 4th vs. 5th game. A very good team will be out after one round. And to those who say the Blues are overachieving...I don't see it. I mean, nobody expected them to do this well, so maybe they are overachieving in that respect, but after watching them play every game and watching how they have responded to Hitchcock and his system...they're just playing good, solid hockey. And this was supposed to be a playoff team last year, but injuries and underachieving did them in. I'm not surprised with how this team is playing, but I am surprised at how well Elliott has played this year...and now Halak is on a tear. Their goaltending is the difference between them being simply a decent playoff team and them being in a fight for 1st overall in the NHL. Neil Smith on NBC Sports picked the Blues to win the West a couple days ago...not that that means anything, but my eyebrows jumped up when he said that, mainly because usually analysts side with the Detroits or Chicagos of the NHL when picking a division/conference winner since they have recent history on their side and it's a safer pick. It was just nice for the Blues to get a little recognition from the talking heads who usually can't stop talking about how great Detroit and Chicago are.

May the better team win. Good luck fellas (but not too much). I wonder which Blues player Shanny will decide to suspend for sneezing on a Wing player this time?

The Blues, as good as they have been, probably need to see a slight increase in goal scoring if they are to keep pace and challenge for the Central Division or Western Conference crown. Getting Steen and Andy Mac back soon should help, and it would be nice if Stewart or Berglund would get on track, which they have yet to do. They seem to be able to score goals when they need them, and they had a nice outburst in early January, but the biggest concern Blues fans have is goal scoring...but it's hard to complain too much when they are winning.

I'd love to hear why you think this is the case. Right now, the Blues have the best goaltending in the NHL (a team 1.91 GAA) and essentially have two #1's. Enlighten me as to why you think they will all of a sudden need a new #1 to start next season.

If the average temp. in St. Louis is 39 degrees on Jan. 1st, how in the world can there be a better chance of it being 55 degrees? That makes no sense. Quite often it's cold and snowy on Jan. 1st in St. Louis. And FYI, it was colder in St. Louis on Jan. 1st this year than it was in Philly for the WC this year. So there's that. And like I said before, it can be quite warm and still be ok for outdoor ice. NHL ice doesn't melt at 33 degrees. It melts at a much higher temp., plus there's the refrigeration system that keeps it frozen. The NHL once played an outdoor game at night in Las Vegas in the preseason, so they can almost much have it anywhere they want without concern for the ice. The sun is actually a greater concern for melting the ice than the temp is. Now, pay attention folks, just to make myself perfectly clear... this is NOT me lobbying and saying the NHL SHOULD have the WC in St. Louis (like some of you will take from this), I'm just saying they easily could if they wanted to without concern for the ice or anything like that.

I'm not upset the Blues aren't in it. I don't expect them to be, and I never said they should be. Sure, I'd like them to be in it, but I understand why they aren't...but that isn't my point...never has been. I'm not sure why that keeps being brought up. The Blues may get in in the future if they continue to play well, make the playoffs and it would help to acquire a superstar to market. It's hard to market balanced scoring and a team game unless you are orginal six or have had recent success, even though they are fun to watch this year. Anyway, my point is (for the fifth time) after next year, the NHL will have used recycled teams three times in a row in only the 6th year of the event. I understand why they are doing it, I get it...that's not rocket surgery. But I don't have to like it, and it's perfectly understandable why fans of other teams wouldn't like it. I like the Winter Classic, I'll watch it no matter who is in it...but it would be nice to see new teams in it every year. Aside from the Blues being a good team right know, show me where I inferred anything close to what you are saying. What?? First off, most of what you commented on was me joking around. You need to get a sense of humor. Second, the rest of your comments don't even accurately reflect what I have said. Congrats for completely misreading and misinterpreting my posts.

Oh yeah? Cite your source please. Thanks.

I was off by a year in my first comment, sue me. That doesn't change my point. After next year, there will have been recycled teams 3 years in a row in only six total years of the WC. Thanks for the attack btw. Surely you understand why other fans would be annoyed by this? If not, I don't know what else to say. I'm not your buddy, friend. The Blues are on pace for 109 pts...which would be their 2nd best finish in team history behind the 114 pt. President's trophy team in '99-'00...and a better finish than the Conference Finals team of '00-'01. Offensively, yes, there have been far better Blues teams...but overall, few have been better...so far. There is a lot of hockey left to play yet though. I'm not banking on anything yet...too much can happen. Well isn't that the obvious statement of the day. I doubt I'd complain. But I would completely understand if other fans did. From a fan's point of view, the NHL shouldn't recycle teams so quickly. Not sure what that has to do with anything... But wait...oh yeah...I forgot where I was posting for a moment. Woah...hold on... "anything Detroit"?? Hmmm... Why don't you put together a list for me? Seriously. I assume there are a few good places to eat? I guess the Lions were fun to watch this year. And hey, you can see Canada. What else ya got? Look this isn't about the Wings and it's not about Blues fans, so don't make it out to be that. It's about the last 2 years of the WC and next year's WC all having recycled teams when the WC has only been around for 6 years after next year. I'm not saying anything that a LOT of other fans aren't already thinking. But hey, congrats on being in the WC again. Must be nice.

I was off by a year. My point is, after next year: - Detroit: Twice - Pittsburgh: Twice - Philadelphia: Twice After the next WC, the last three will have had recycled teams. In six years of the WC, three teams have been in it twice already. That's a little ridiculous. Granted, I understand why...ratings. It's just getting old.

That's just spin. I'm not really focusing on the Wings, just the constant appearance of the same teams over the past few years. In each game after the first two, there has been one new team and one team that has been recycled. I am well aware of that. And it makes sense. I've made that comment before. The Blues do have a decent following and traditionally get very good ratings when on national television. The success part has alluded them in previous seasons, but it seems they have the ship righted...finally. This was supposed to happen last year, but better late than never. First, I do not have an inferiority complex towards the Wings. It's simply a sports rivalry-hatred kind of thing. Don't read too much into it. And that has nothing to do with my rant on the Winter Classic. It's all about recycling teams so quickly. Obviously Detroit deserves to be in it...I was surprised they didn't get in the first one, but whatever. But being in it twice in four years? Come on. It's annoying. Second... I don't have a second. My thoughts exactly. I wouldn't say that. I can easily see San Jose or LA getting in.

Not true. Back in the 90's, the NHL held a preseason outdoor game in Las Vegas, and the ice was fine. It doesn't need to be below freezing to sustain ice. And it's not actually ice, it has an additive in it that helps it stay frozen at higher temperatures. Besides, the avg. temp for St. Louis on Jan. 1st is in the upper 30's. So even if weather was an issue (which it isn't), chances are it would be ok temp-wise in St. Louis. Now, with that said...I am sure the NHL wants the cold climate and possibility for snow...it just adds to the atmosphere of being a Winter event. So I can see the event not being held in a warm climate for that reason.

Obviously you guys are excited, and you should be. But speaking as a fan of another team, it's pretty irritating that the NHL keeps putting the same damn teams in the Winter Classic every couple years. I'm sure you'd feel the same way if Detroit hadn't been in it yet and three other teams had been in it twice already in 5 years. Obviously Wings and Leafs fans are happy, but I'm not so sure about most other fans. I hear a lot of grumbling about recycled teams and how people are losing interest because of that (maybe just talk...I'm sure they'd still watch it). Yes, the original six match up is cool, it's an old rivalry between Toronto and Detroit, I get it...but the NHL needs to get some new teams in there. You know Chicago will get it again in a year or two (hopefully against St. Louis, in St. Louis)...and surely if Crosby ever comes back, Pittsburgh will get it again in a 2-3 years. So I fully expect the trend of recycling teams to continue. I just hope the Blues get in before the NHL decides to scrap the Winter Classic due to falling ratings or the novelty wearing off, or whatever.

Somebody doesn't get it. But seriously, I agreed with everything I quoted you on above. And I've said that I don't have a problem with Cole getting suspended, just the length of suspension. But I am afraid you are wrong about Datsyuk's hit not being debatable on if it is or isn't suspension worthy...we've been debating it for few pages now. A lot of Wings fans think it's not suspension worthy. A lot of Blues fans think it could be and wanted it reviewed. I've heard mixed reviews from other folks who comment after videos and articles. Not surprising really. However, to reference an earlier portion of this thread...on the Datsyuk-Jackman hit, I think it's very interesting that the Red Wings blogger at kuklaskorner said, "...a problem that still seems to exist for the NHL is a lack of consistency in terms of dealing with such hits. For instance, Pavel Datsyuk appeared to get away entirely with a hit to Barret Jackman’s head during the same game." Again, thanks to Leftwinger for requesting that I find "just one" non-Blues fan article that said Datsyuk got away with one...and the first one I find is from none other than an actual Red Wings blogger on a pretty prominent hockey commentary/reporting site. I find that hilarious. My point... it's not just Blues fans. Anyone tired of this debate yet? I am.