Nightfall

0-2 today. You match the score except you are playing as the Coyotes.

What game are you watching? No penalties yet.

Helm's hit and then a pass to the point was key on the first goal! SCORE AGAIN! 2-0!

I don't state that people have their red wings glasses on. I stated "if you have your red wings glasses on" but I digress. It was aimed at you in specific. In regards to me, I have both sets of glasses on. I am a die hard Wings fan, but at the same time, I do have glasses on in regards to the refs perspective of things. Its amazing how some people see a situation develop, and they are up in arms about it. Then you have others who say things transpired 100% differently. As you said though, its all said and done. I am looking forward to Game 3!

Yet, in the case of the non-call on Franzen, there is a wide variety of people who can't come to a conclusion on if a call should be made. Wings fans insist there was a missed call, yet you have many people who say there was no call. So who is right? Who makes that distinction? How is that distinction made? Is it made with or without the aid of instant replay? I do have to agree with you. The refs should be striving for perfection. The fans just have to realize that perfection will never be achieved, especially at the highest level of hockey. The most recognized refs like McCreary and Frasier are a rare breed. The refs at this level go up and down all the time. If they can't cut it, they go back down to the AHL level. That should show that things are being done by the league to get the best refs they can.

No, the sentence I quoted was the most important of everything. As for Doan, I had to watch the play in slow motion to even get the hint that Doan was pushing Franzen. Watching in real time, I still think that Doan barely initiated contact. As I keep saying though, its all about perception when you watch the play. If you have your Red Wings glasses on, I think you could more easily come to a conclusion that Franzen was annihilated by Doan. If you have the slightest ability to see it from a refs perspective, you could see that it may be incidental contact.

Yup, I am. Just got done reffing a couple adult league games less than 2 hours ago.

You are throwing a lot of "what if" situations out there. The simple fact of the matter is we won't know how the refs are going to call something until the situation presents itself. Then, the refs in charge of the game will need to process the situation and make the appropriate calls or don't call anything. The sooner that people here realize that human perception is the key to how a game is called, the better off they will be. I don't get bent out of shape when it comes to reffing anymore because I have wore the stripes and reffed games. I think more people here need to do the same thing. Its easy to levy criticism. Its hard to walk (or in this case, skate) in the shoes of someone else.

The slow motion in front of Franzen would be great to see because the stick may not have hit him in the face. I really can't tell 100%. I think you just answered your own question. You have to watch it in HD and in slow motion to even see the penalty. If Babcock saw this, then maybe his tune would have changed. I am not surprised that the refs didn't call anything on it.

You failed to underline the second most important line. "There is an enormous amount of judgment involved in the application of this rule by the Referees."

I guess I don't see it the way you do. Even the announcers say it was a clean hit, and I have to agree with them as well. The stick doesn't even appear to get up in the face of Franzen. Anyone have a slower replay we can look at? I like Babcocks' take on the hit. Either way, I am siding with the call on the ice on this play in specific. Now the Helm boarding call was weak, and I haven't even watched the 3rd period yet.

You might want to watch the replay again. Franzen already lost his balance. Doan barely touched him. I was watching the game with a few other hockey fans and even they were ok with the non call, and yes, they were Detroit fans as well. As for the other calls in the 3rd period, I am going to have a look at the game in its entirety today. I had to leave at the start of the 3rd period because of a hockey tournament I was playing in.

I agree with this. Anyone passing judgment on this alone is an idiot. The ticket isn't even a real DPS ticket. The address is wrong. The article that the freep is referencing is not from a credible source. I say add all these things up and something stinks. Yet, that doesn't stop the sheep here thats for sure.

I have had one of those before and they are a pain in the ass as a goalie. I was out for 3 weeks too as I couldn't butterfly or push off without pain. Could I have played? Yes, but I wouldn't have been very good. I am glad to hear that Zetterberg is not seriously injured. I think sitting him would be a good thing. Let him heal up, and then come back strong.

There are three types of players. 1. Those who produce in the regular season 2. Those who produce in the post season 3. Those who produce in both We know what category Franzen is in.

The refs may screw one team or the other in a game, but I am a firm believer that the best team always comes out on top when the series is over.

I disagree. The team is about the same as it was back in 08-09. Sure, you had Hossa, but I believe there is a better balance of scoring on this team than there was back then. Course, we are comparing history to an event that hasn't happened yet.

People said the same thing about Dats back in 2009 as well, but we made it through a lot of games without him. When he did come back in Game 5 of the finals, he was a great shot in the arm for that game, but we still lost the series to the Pens even with him in the lineup. Its going to take a team effort, but the Wings have the players and the depth.

I am not concerned about it. The Wings can win without him if they put forth the effort. Of course, to win the Stanley Cup, you have to have health and some puck luck as well. When Malhotra went down for Vancouver, the Canucks probably didn't feel too good about that, but they can still win without him in the lineup due to the depth they have. I believe in the Red Wings.

So every time blood is drawn, a replay should be used to determine what happened? I can agree with that, at the same time though, how many high sticking incidents have we seen where teammates have hit each other with their own sticks. Without instant replay, if the ref didn't see it, there is no way to call a high stick. I say let instant replay sort it out. Anytime blood is drawn, bring up the play and take the offending player to the box for 4 minutes. I do agree that in many games, I have seen blood drawn and no call was made. So its not just the Wings here. Oh, and the play when Stuart lost the puck in his own zone, you should watch the replays. There was no penalty on that play. Stuart lost an edge and fell. So, the refs by not calling that made the right call. At the same time though, how many times have we seen a player fall and a tripping call was made, and yet there was no trip? Seems that more and more people want instant replay to be used to determine penalties. I would like to see more of instant replay being used. The only question is, how can we use it without extending the game 30 more minutes for all the stoppages? Maybe during TV timeouts they review plays with toronto? Just an idea. You are comparing the NHL refs back in 1996 to the NHL refs of today with a different ruleset. Today, that would have been called no doubt. Back then, in the clutch, grab, hold, hitting NHL, it was a different story. Secondly, who are you proposing that you put the judgement in the hands of? I hate to tell you this, but in every professional sport, the refs are handing out judgements all the time. Sometimes they are legit, and other times they are not. This is what makes sports so exciting/thrilling to watch. So, by saying "dumbf*** ref" you are probably against all forms of reffing. Reffing is just part of any professional sport.

So many people want the league to apply "common sense" and "intent" into reffing. Then, when I see posts like this, I realize that some people here only want that kind of latitude if it involves only the team they root for. Everyone else, the letter of the law will suffice.

I think San Jose is going to march all over the Kings. I predict 6 games at the most, but that may be pushing it. The sharks are ready for a deep run into the playoffs and they have all the pieces to win the cup if everything works out in their favor. IMHO, Niemi will be the key for this team. If he has a strong playoff like last season with Chicago, then they could go all the way.

I have seen a few hockey plays where a player lifts another players stick. In the act of lifting the stick, the players OWN stick goes right up into his face. You are right though, that has never happened to me but I play goal more than I skate as a forward/defense. Thats why when the Chicago announcers said that, I was shaking my head in the car. The NHL on the Fly game recap confirmed what I thought and that was a high stick.

I stand corrected. I thought I read 7:30 on the NHL network last night. That was my bad.

Thanks a lot for doing this again this playoff season. My picks: VAN/CHI: 4-3 SJS/LAK: 4-2 DET/PHX: 4-2 ANA/NSH: 4-2 WAS/NYR: 4-1 PHI/BUF: 4-2 BOS/MTL: 4-2 PIT/TBL: 4-3 WC Champion: Detroit Red Wings EC Champion: Washington Capitals SCF Champion: Detroit Red Wings