KillerB14

I still can't fathom how that play didn't get Clowe a suspension, fine, review, whatever. There's videos of it, the league knows it happened, the NHL network was celebrating how awesome it was that he did it. I can't imagine that's within the rules to not draw some punishment after the game. 77% of percentages posted online are made up.

My pregnant boss was reaching for a stapler on her desk so I #PulledACrosby and knocked it away. What was I suppose to do? I hate swinglines.

Round 1 Template: VAN/CHI: 4-2 SJS/LAK: 4-1 DET/PHX: 4-2 ANA/NSH: 4-3 WAS/NYR: 4-1 PHI/BUF: 4-3 BOS/MTL: 4-2 PIT/TBL: 4-2 WC Champion:VAN EC Champion:WAS SCF Champion:WAS

That's not what it looks like at all. If you drew a line in the direction it started heading before Hossa's stick was near it to the point when it hit the post on the far end it would be straight. The puck never changed direction. It stayed on the same path.

No, it's not the same. For Bertuzzi, it's the league applying the rule, as dumb as it is (say intent to blow), it's still the rule and they applied it. Here's the league ruling from the St. Louis Dispatch http://www.stltoday.com/sports/hockey/professional/article_e8c5a6e4-c5dd-5e5d-8513-d20461653139.html "Chicago's Marian Hossa appeared to kick the puck toward the net, and a replay didn't show conclusive evidence that the puck crossed the goal line. Nonetheless, after a lengthy review, the NHL's war room ruled that Hossa hit the puck with his stick after kicking it. No explanation was given about the puck going in." So league chose to say Hossa's stick touched it, even though it would have caused it to change direction, even if a little bit. It didn't move it didn't fully cross the line. We'll never know unless we can get different angles. Some will cry conspiracy, I'll stick with my opinion. The league is just that bad at this stuff.

I remember that goal and yes I thought for sure it would be called back. The thing is with that goal, it was ruled a goal because "kicking backwards" wasn't a kicking motion, only forward. Which sounded so dumb to me at the time and still does. Still, that is how the league ruled on that play. Later in the season a goal stood against the Wings with the same idea cause his foot moved backwards, not a "forward kicking motion." Not the same thing, Bertuzzi's was allowed to stand because of how the league interprets the rule NOT because the league decided to overlook the fact he kicked it.

Yes. IF Conklin hit the puck in it would have been a good goal. Your allowed to speculate on that. Thing is, he didn't. His glove came around the puck to the back of it and swept it out. The puck had actually stopped moving before the glove came over it and there was no white in between the puck and the goal line. Never crossed. If Hossa's stick ever touched it, even slightly, it would have changed direction, even slightly. It didn't until it hit the other side. I'm not screaming conspiracy. I decided years back that there's two options, 1) Conspiracy. 2) They are just that terrible. We are reminded game after game of any teams playing how badly the refs and Toronto is. Yay NHL.

I remember hearing Smith said he'd stay and assist while Lewis said he didn't want to assist and would leave if Smith was head. The organization went with Lewis to keep both of them. Could have been a rumor but probably had some truth. I'd love to have his defensive mind on the coaching staff now.

Maybe he was argueing the fact that Bylsma could have been fined for not controlling his bench but no fine was given. The player got 9 games, that's huge. Seems they wanted to make it bad but not as bad as the punishment for leaving the bench to go double up on some guy like Goddard did and was given 10 by default.

Any fans of playoff caliber teams in the East or the West. This is a huge blow to the Penguins and can definitely change the favorites come playoffs. Unless you're a casual fan and don't care to see ahead to what's going on with the league then you should care about this.

I was at the game and all the penalties i can remember were hooking when someone got close to the net. by the 3rd, me and my friends were saying any time there was gonna be a parade to the box of make up calls, but the Wings never gave the refs a chance besides the Ericsson hooking penalty which was a easy make up call. He just went to place body and pushed. i didnt agree with all the Habs calls against but they were right on our guys with their sticks. Best part was the atmosphere. We cheered Let's Go Red Wings, and during the "clap" part they cheered, Go Habs Go! We started cheering, Let's Go Red Wings! followed by a booooooo to drown out the "Go Habs Go!" The crowd was amazing!

Man, people on here are brutal. Nice vid. Crymson, where'd you get that clip? I missed the entire first game and would like to see some of these questionable calls to be able to make my own mind up. thanks in advance

SJS/DET: 2-4 CHI/VAN: 4-3 PIT/MTL: 4-2 BOS/PHI: 3-4

He didn't dive. The first cross check put him a little off balance the second one put him dangerously into the boards. He did lie there and try to sell it but the refs arm should have went up as soon as he hit the boards.

I might be the only one that feels there was no interference on Helm, but both him and Doan were going towards the faceoff dot. Helm was not trying to get to the point. They both can own that space. They made contact and Helm fell. That would have been a terrible call to make. I've seen the refs miss high stick calls before and it's always absurd, my only question was why did they blow the whistle to stop the play? Lidstrom was skating towards the bench to make a change, he wasn't lying on the ice. Players get hurt constantly and make their way to the bench and the play doesn't stop. For me it's not so much the missed high-stick it's everything that surrounds it that just makes it shady. He gets high-sticked, bends over, straightens back up and skates towards the bench. While that was happening Wings never lost control of the puck, Williams had just gotten a pass from Zetterberg and was about to pass into the slot and the play is blown dead. Lidstrom is at the bench by that time. Refs and Linesmen get together to talk about tuesdays episode of LOST and then they just continue the game. WTF just happened??? Why blow the play dead when the Wings had control? Why have a meeting when no one was calling a penalty anyway? Why say a comment so foolish that one of the most quietest, respectful players in the league is moved to call you out on it? It's a long series and an even longer playoff run, the Wings will be mad for how poorly they played and come out flying. Unlike the Sharks, Penguins, Capitals and Devils the Wings haven't lost at home, I doubt anyone who picked the Pens or Caps to win is changing it after one loss. I'm not changing mine. GO WINGS!!!

Round 1 Template: SJS/COL: 4-2 CHI/NSH: 4-2 VAN/LAK: 4-3 PHX/DET: 4-2 WAS/MTL: 4-0 NJD/PHI: 4-1 BUF/BOS: 4-3 PIT/OTT: 4-1 WC Champion: Detroit Red Wings EC Champion: Washington Capitals SCF Champion: Detroit Red Wings

Oh yeah the offensive player usually spends the last 5 seconds of a game crosschecking the defending player. It's the defender trying to keep the offensive player away from the net. Zetterberg was watching the play. Crosby had already given up on the game and was taking liberties on someone who was still playing. It was a punk move and would be a punk move if done by anyone. You're "defending" of Crosby is making you sound less and less like you know what's going on. THAT play does not happen in front of the net very often at all.

You defend crosby because you found two quotes of someone who thinks Bertuzzi has more class?

He credits Zetterberg's defensive play to Lidstrom and Rafalski. Then he turns the question around and talks about how hard he battles. Said Howard knew the linesman was there and was just trying to get in free shots. Howard was there before the linesman and free shots was all crosby was trying to do to Zetts at the end. Was anyone else immediately reminded of Malkin at the end of game two last year? Crosby is the worst. The guy's dellusional.

They were a hot team in the east, but with a healthy Datsyuk that series was over in 5. Maybe a trade would work, except no point in trading if it means our young guys and who wants our older guys save Lidstrom, Zetts and Dats? How close was pittsburgh to the cap to make a trade? Wings do not have much room. The two teams are in very different situations. We really can't tell what this Wings team is all about because of all the injuries. We shouldn't change coaches for that reason, Babcock's one of/if not the best coach in the league. But unless more guys go down, this injury excuse is over. We have Eaves and Kronwall out. Plenty teams play with two key guys out. The Wings need to just get down to it and start winning games. That's it.

I always call him "Bertuzzi Tuesdays", been calling him that since the first time he was with the Wings. Me and my cousin watched a Wings game on a Tuesday night, got hammered and have been calling him that ever since. Doesn't make any sense to anyone else around when i say it but it rhymes, kinda.

Careful with your definites. I doubt you have any idea how "everybody" and "us all"felt in 2004 compared to right now.

I can't understand why he did. It was a ridiculously quick whistle. There are plenty of times a puck is shot at the goalie and he makes the save and 1...2...whistle. This puck was shot, bounced through Fluery, crossed the line, whistle. The Refs should not have an intent to blow the whistle as soon as it touches a goaltender. The problem is the rule. It gives Refs an opportunity to go back in time and stop the play where they see fit. That play should have been allowed to be played out. Fluery never made the save. That avs player scored a goal. It was way too quick of a whistle(intent, since the puck was across the line when the whistle went) for that kind of play. The puck has been under goalies and whack, whack, whack away finally a whistle. That early Phoenix game, Ozzie had the puck under him. No whistle, the guy pushed Ozzie off the puck and put it into the net. Not trying to start anything about that game, over and done with. The point is the lengths of whistles at times, also the times they call goals back cause they intended to blow the whistle before the puck crossed the line but couldn't blow the whistle fast enough. Then that should be a goal. How dumb does that sound, "I wanted to blow the whistle before the puck moved across the line but..." BEFORE IT CROSSED THE LINE! The puck was still moving but the ref is allowed to go back to before it crossed the line and say that's when the play stopped. How completely and utterly F'ed up does that sound? IF the puck goes into the net, it's a goal! The puck is moving, the goalie didn't make the save! Why does the NHL allow these to be called back? Cleary's second goal against Calgary that was waived off was unfortunate but is believable. The Ref lost sight whistle blown. Puck was never in the net till after it actually bounced off the Ref's skate to Cleary who put it in. With this Avs game, the puck was already in the net. Already in the net! Am I going crazy or something???