Barry Trotz turned into a Nancy

[Jwo 7]

Look at me! My name is Barry Trotz and i'm a plonker.

Edited April 13, 2008 by Jwo

[umredwing11 2]

“We proved that we can play with them,” Predators center Radek Bonk said. “Just lost because of a couple of lucky bounces.”

Per yahoosports

If nashville continues to think that bad bounces are the only thing distinguishing them from a loss and a victory, this will be a short series.

[Barrie 900]

I hope Nashville continues to talk, it gives us more motivation to shut 'em up and send 'em home.

Mostly from what I've seen is Nashville has been unable to take advantage of their chances, and we have. You can't blame the refs for missed opportunities. I counted 3 times in Game 2 when Nashville went offside on possible 3 on 2 rushes. And they weren't able to generate any momentum when the tied the Game 2-2, after a couple bounces went their way.

[Shaman 713]

I think the funniest thing ive seen about this is on the preds board some kid is claiming that detroit paid off the refs and then someone else is saying the Wings dont know about bad officiating. I would advise them to see Calgary in 04, Anaheim last year, among many other NUMEROUS examples of s***ty calls (and Noncalls) going against detroit.

[SouthernWingsFan 854]

On to Nashville, and some of the best chants in all of sports.

At least they make noise almost the entire game...

[Sergeiwasmyfav 0]

At least they make noise almost the entire game...

Personally, I'd rather be at the Joe any day than Nashville's arena. I would rather sit in silence than listen to the absurd chants alluded to above. Also, I don't understand why everyone gets on Detroit fans for not being loud enough (that's not directed specifically at you, SWF, just in general). Perhaps we don't feel the need to cheer maniacally at every single thing that takes place in the game. "The Preds iced the puck!!! YES!!!! Standing Ovation!!!!" I can do without that, thank you, because I think it shows knowledge of the game; it shows the fans know what is really important and what is not. Not that icings aren't helpful, but they don't deserve the same response as, say, Kronwall's hit in Game 1.

Edited April 13, 2008 by Sergeiwasmyfav

[SouthernWingsFan 854]

Personally, I'd rather be at the Joe any day than Nashville's arena. I would rather sit in silence than listen to the absurd chants alluded to above. Also, I don't understand why everyone gets on Detroit fans for not being loud enough (that's not directed specifically at you, SWF, just in general). Perhaps we don't feel the need to cheer maniacally at every single thing that takes place in the game. "The Preds iced the puck!!! YES!!!! Standing Ovation!!!!" I can do without that, thank you, because I think it shows knowledge of the game; it shows the fans know what is really important and what is not. Not that icings aren't helpful, but they don't deserve the same response as, say, Kronwall's hit in Game 1.

I gotcha, it's different environments definitely.

It's been pretty well documented in here though by plenty of posters in the past that wished JLA was louder more often than not.

And now we get on fans of another team for doing just that and being noisy/passionate, like they are wrong all of a sudden. That just doesn't sound right to me.

Be proud/excited that you support a team with such a storied franchise and a team that is consistently good, but what Nashville fans do doesn't make their fan base pieces of scum. Don't make it sound that way, it makes our fan base sound bad.

[Sergeiwasmyfav 0]

I gotcha, it's different environments definitely.

It's been pretty well documented in here though by plenty of posters in the past that wished JLA was louder more often than not.

And now we get on fans of another team for doing just that and being noisy/passionate, like they are wrong all of a sudden. That just doesn't sound right to me.

Be proud/excited that you support a team with such a storied franchise and a team that is consistently good, but what Nashville fans do doesn't make their fan base pieces of scum. Don't make it sound that way, it makes our fan base sound bad.

Agreed. I don't think they are bad people, and I'm actually happy that they have fans in their arena who care about the team because I think it is good for the NHL. I too have often wished the Joe was louder in general, so I know what you mean there. I just meant that in some cities, they cheer so loud for every little thing, that it seems that they don't know what means something and what does not. But overall, I agree, the environments are totally different, and we shouldn't be condescending towards their fans. But, I'm not gonna lie, I still can't stand the chants.

Edited April 13, 2008 by Sergeiwasmyfav

[gsusluvshockey 0]

I still think that their goal when they crashed into the net was truly a nongoal. When they showed it in slowmo and I replayed it in slowmo (double slowmo) you can see that the net is being lifted up before the puck crosses the line. The net wasn't completely off but it was lifted up.

[edicius 3,269]

I still think that their goal when they crashed into the net was truly a nongoal. When they showed it in slowmo and I replayed it in slowmo (double slowmo) you can see that the net is being lifted up before the puck crosses the line. The net wasn't completely off but it was lifted up.

Agreed, that's what I noticed too. Imagine if the puck had been going high, but with the net raised a few inches, it suddenly clinks off the bar then goes in. That's why the rule's there.

[Dawgs 0]

First off I not so sure Homer was in the blue. After watching the play several times it looks to me like Homers heel was up in the air, crossing the line but not on the ice. Only his toe was touching the ice and that was clearly outside the blue.

I mentioned this in another thread, but it bears repeating.

Trotz said (of Holmstrom), "When I really watched it in review, his feet were in the blue," Predators coach Barry Trotz said. "According to the rules, you can't be in the blue."

Trotz really needs to brush up on his NHL rules...

From the current NHL rulebook:

69.1 Interference on the Goalkeeper - This rule is based on the premise that an attacking player’s position, whether inside or outside the crease, should not, by itself, determine whether a goal should be allowed or disallowed. In other words, goals scored while attacking players are standing in the crease may, in appropriate circumstances be allowed.

It ain't illegal to be in the blue anymore, Barry. Hasn't been for almost a decade. Not since the infamous Hull goal.

The funny thing about the rule 69.1 is that they will call off a goal like Homers when there was a good legitimate screen for his skate being partially in the blue but if a player crashes the net and takes out a goalie and the puck goes in it counts.

Im sure Trotz's whining was for the benefit of the officials and the NHL, lobbying hard for uneven officiating back in Nashville that goes in his favor, while his message to his team will be far different.

His real problem is not the officating though, its the fact that besides the first period in game 2 and some brief moments in game 1 his team has been totally outclassed and officiating isnt going to matter. The Wings are clearly the better hockey team having dominated long stretches of both games, outshooting Nashville nearly 2-1, outscoring them 7-3 and leading in every measurable stat in hockey including hits.

[Mors 201]

First off I not so sure Homer was in the blue. After watching the play several times it looks to me like Homers heel was up in the air, crossing the line but not on the ice. Only his toe was touching the ice and that was clearly outside the blue.

The funny thing about the rule 69.1 is that they will call off a goal like Homers when there was a good legitimate screen for his skate being partially in the blue but if a player crashes the net and takes out a goalie and the puck goes in it counts.

Im sure Trotz's whining was for the benefit of the officials and the NHL, lobbying hard for uneven officiating back in Nashville that goes in his favor, while his message to his team will be far different.

His real problem is not the officating though, its the fact that besides the first period in game 2 and some brief moments in game 1 his team has been totally outclassed and officiating isnt going to matter. The Wings are clearly the better hockey team having dominated long stretches of both games, outshooting Nashville nearly 2-1, outscoring them 7-3 and leading in every measurable stat in hockey including hits.

This is the part that seems to be overlooked in the widely syndicated AP article which basically says the Wings ONLY won because of the officiating. No mention anywhere that the captain of their team has 1 shot on goal in 2 games...not like that's important or anything ^^

[pjgj13 30]

I still think that their goal when they crashed into the net was truly a nongoal. When they showed it in slowmo and I replayed it in slowmo (double slowmo) you can see that the net is being lifted up before the puck crosses the line. The net wasn't completely off but it was lifted up.

I thought I was the only one that saw that. Thanks!!

[BlueMonk 102]

The funny thing about the rule 69.1 is that they will call off a goal like Homers when there was a good legitimate screen for his skate being partially in the blue but if a player crashes the net and takes out a goalie and the puck goes in it counts.

Yeah, this is what gets me about this rule. Goaltenders are rendered defenseless all the time by a pile of crashing humanity and they rarely call back those goals. But then they split hairs over whether the skate of a forward who's basically just standing still, not initiating any contact, was in or out.

Anyway, Homer really has had a bullseye on his back this year. The league made an example of him and he's been judged by a double standard all season. I couldn't care f**k all if he gets a break at this point. In fact, after all the playoff series the Wings could have won the past 5 years if not for "lucky breaks," I'll take all the gifts they can get. That's how playoff hockey is won and lost every year anyway.

[RedFX 48]

What I want to know is why Trotz seemed so suprised and outraged when Homer does that. You'd think that playing against him 6-8 times a year for the last 9 years would have given you some indication that he likes to sit in front of the net.

Second, the goal was clean, period. Homer was not in the crease, he was not impeding Ellis's ability to play the puck, he was doing what he always does, and he's doing it legally. If you don't like it, put a body on him.

The goal that got called back was a legitimate gripe IMO. Still that's not the reason Nashville lost.

I've honestly never heard the level of complaining here this bad before. Instead of blaming the refs, blame your scoring line for taking dumb penalties late in the game. Blame your captain for taking one shot in two games. And stop acting like you're theonly team in NHL history thats ever been screwed over by the refs.

[Barrie 900]

I still think that their goal when they crashed into the net was truly a nongoal. When they showed it in slowmo and I replayed it in slowmo (double slowmo) you can see that the net is being lifted up before the puck crosses the line. The net wasn't completely off but it was lifted up.

I agree and noticed that as well, the net was lifted and was coming off when the puck was going in.

NO GOAL!

[Matt 1,049]

A nice shot from the Freep of Lidstrom's goal. Now I may have to look at the replay again (the overhead), but his feet certainly are not in the blue here.

[chrisdetroit 189]

He also said that the refs told him on the goal didn't count because they were in the process of blowing their whistle when the net came off. Trotz said that was a "bail out". Mickey even commented negatively on the "bail out" reference by Trotz.

I agree with Trotz, they got robbed. The first goal should have counted. BUT it probably would not have changed the outcome because it was very early in the game. The Wings totally outplayed them for the last 2 periods.

As far as Homer. It's pretty simple and you would think that Trotz would know this. Homer plays on the edge of goalie interference. With that I mean he is always close to interfering. Sometimes he does, sometimes he doesn't. Usually it is a judgement call. Sometimes he gets away with one and sometimes he gets whistled unjustly. That's the way he plays and he will not change it. That's why he is so good.

There's only a couple of things you can do about it

1) Move him out of the way. This is almost impossible because he is very good at not moving and the oposition sometimes takes penalties themselves. Sometimes you get so distracted trying to move Homer that you lose focus and the puck ends up in the back of the net.

2) Play that way in front of Hasek. Also not easy to do because the wings players will make you pay. Most forwards are not willing to pay the price. Ryan Smyth is pretty good at it but nobody compares to Homer.

3) Whine about it so that you get the officials to pay more attention. This has mixed results. Sometimes it works for awhile but it usually only helps when there is clear interference. Once in awhile you will get a legitament goal called back when their is no interference.

Trotz has chose to go with option 3. Will it work? Maybe

I guess it really must be a ***** to have to play against the Wings when Homer is in his office.

[edicius 3,269]

A nice shot from the Freep of Lidstrom's goal. Now I may have to look at the replay again (the overhead), but his feet certainly are not in the blue here.

Nice find, Matt. I'd say that's damn near conclusive. Trotz doesn't have a leg to stand on. Or a neck.

[Nev 1,085]

I thought at the time, and I still think it, that on Lidstrom's goal, the screen set by Homer was the perfect screen.

His ass is millimeters from Ellis's face, but he never touches him, he never gets in the way of his movement, he stays out of the paint, and he is completely in the sight line of Ellis towards Lidstrom as he is shooting the puck. Trotz doesn't have a leg to stand on.

Having said that, I totally expect Detroit to have a goal called back Monday night for goaltender interference

[IceMunkee 15]

A nice shot from the Freep of Lidstrom's goal. Now I may have to look at the replay again (the overhead), but his feet certainly are not in the blue here.

Can we email this pic to the Trotter? Maybe with an explaination and a classified?

[GMRwings1983 8,804]

I thought at the time, and I still think it, that on Lidstrom's goal, the screen set by Homer was the perfect screen.

His ass is millimeters from Ellis's face, but he never touches him, he never gets in the way of his movement, he stays out of the paint, and he is completely in the sight line of Ellis towards Lidstrom as he is shooting the puck. Trotz doesn't have a leg to stand on.

Having said that, I totally expect Detroit to have a goal called back Monday night for goaltender interference

Yeah, I think this is what Trashville is trying to do, much like Phil Jackson always does it in the NBA. When you ***** about the officiating enough, eventually they'll start making favorable calls for you just to avoid more criticism.

[Superman54 91]

That pic with Holms clearly shows Trotz was just trying to find excuses, without any evidence with his sayings. Sometimes I think us wing fans are the only people with common sense when it comes to hockey...

[betterREDthandead 58]

Just a reminder. Trotz isn't the only one who should be roasted here. David Poile is also crying. Very ironic, too. From the Freep:

Radek Bonk appeared to slide into the goal a split second before Radulov's shot went in. But the puck seemed to have crossed the goal line before Bonk knocked the net off its moorings.

Hmmm. So Bonk was in the net, let alone in the crease, and the goal should have counted. But Homer's goal should have been waved off?

[datsyukismyfriend 4]

Just a reminder. Trotz isn't the only one who should be roasted here. David Poile is also crying. Very ironic, too. From the Freep:

Hmmm. So Bonk was in the net, let alone in the crease, and the goal should have counted. But Homer's goal should have been waved off?

lol, good point.