egroen

Essentially the answer is -- "Hey, we can't be perfect!" What a joke. It's not perfection we are asking for - it is simply using the tools you already have available to make the right call ON GOALS.

"Less video review is better" Fans can not expect perfection. "At what point do you stop with video review?" "Do not want refs influenced by video review" Just going to have to live with the 4 or 5 times this happens a season [to the Red Wings].

Explained that Toronto calls the ref when a puck goes in the net unobserved -- but if the ref states he intended to call it earlier it is a non-reviewable call. End of story.

“It is a difficult situation†Admitted the puck went in the net directly from the initial shot. Happened 3 or 4 times this season, but the refs call on the ice stands…. Until they make any changes. Implied they will be looking into making a change.

http://radiotime.com/genre/c_379/NHL.aspx Live right now...

Either put them back, or actually use what they were replaced with - instant replay.

No matter what, Chicago is treating a lot of its veteran (and even younger) players like chaff, which is something someone like Ken Holland goes painfully out of his way to avoid. It will affect their ability to sign free agents at discounts and many who come to Chicago in the future are going to try and hold out for no-trade and no-movement clauses.

All goals are reviewed by the Toronto office anyways -- and a called goal can be overruled in the case of the stick being higher than the crease or the puck being kicked. A puck caught on replay being in the net without a ref seeing it can also be called. Yet somehow if a ref "intended" to blow a whistle, even for no apparent reason, all bets are off. It does not take an overhaul of the league to right this -- simply allow for Toronto, where it is already being reviewed, to make sure the right call is made. This will correct 90% of these problems right there. Simple and obvious.

Exact same thing here at 2:50 only a month ago, though they got this one right -- ref calls the goal no good, but the war room confirms the puck was in the net. Goal counts. Now, the ref could have still pulled out the ol' "I intended to blow it earlier" and it would not have counted -- but in the case above he at least has a leg to stand on there. Not last night, with the puck going in straight of a shot.

I just would have loved to see it if the ref actually had blown the whistle when he apparently had "intended" to, yah know -- when May was shooting the puck. I'd love to hear that one explained.

If you are going to have more than one ref on the ice, actually have it do something to improve the game... or replace the one with an ice girl.

Bettman is going to give his canned response "that the game would take forever if they reviewed every single play with instant replay".... which is of course horse s***, because you would only need to review actual goals/non-goals, you freakin' jackass.

*OR*... you could have instant replay!!!

Imagine a ref actually calling a play dead for absolutely no reason, while a puck was being shot on net? Because this is what the ref had "intended" to do? Lol....

I wouldn't be surprised if something crooked went on there -- the Red Wings are pretty much favored to win every single game they play, so good money involved. We all know this goes on in professional sports. I'm not going to scream and yell conspiracy, but I would not exactly be shocked if it turned out at some point in the future that that ref was on the take or had side betting going on.

So when the ref was told the puck went in on the shot, and the play he called dead was actually with the puck in the net... he either was too proud, embarrassed or crooked to acknowledge the goal. The weird thing is he completely could have saved face simply by indicating he called the play dead at the time when he lost sight of the puck, which turned out was actually in the net... goal. Completely understandable, as only really May (and Auld) was aware that was in the goal right away.

I agree... but we are in this situation because the ref was able to disregard the war room. Maybe not incompetent... but pure eviiiil.

Lol... though they did manage to include "the refs get it right 99.9% of the time."

NHL Network just stated the Stars "maybe had a little help from the refs..."

"Instant replay only exists to highlight how incompetent our refs are."

Crazy... the NHL Network has not even mentioned the called-off goal yet. Imagine.

Bertuzzi and the Spin O' Ramas

Playoff games would be huge -- and perhaps a few regular season games against rivals. That would be my interest. It's amazing -- imagine being able to look up a specific play from a specific game in the future?

I had read in the Hockey News a month ago that Campbell has a NMC, but now I am hearing he has a limited NTC -- in that he can provide a list of 8 teams in which Chicago has 45 days to trade him to one of them.

There was never really any doubt they could sign all three, it was just a question of if they could sign them all and still field a competitive team next year. Looks like Chicago did not get the huge discounts some had predicted, but they are very fair deals, nonetheless (at $6 or slightly under).