imisssergei 0 Report post Posted May 15, 2008 Datsyuk's momentum carried him into Turco, thereby impeding the goaltender. No goal. You can't score by pushing the goaltender into the net with the puck. Look at the rule again. Datsyuk was dumped on the play, he was forced into Turco by a Dallas player, it should have been a goal. The only reason is wasn't was because the whistle blew before the puck went in. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
McCartyFanForLife 17 Report post Posted May 15, 2008 Look at the rule again. Datsyuk was dumped on the play, he was forced into Turco by a Dallas player, it should have been a goal. The only reason is wasn't was because the whistle blew before the puck went in. Watch the replay; Datsyuk was NOT dumped by a player. He went down on his own. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
toby91_ca 620 Report post Posted May 15, 2008 I think the reply showed that Homer's right buttcheek was and inch and a half into the blue paint. I saw the replay and watched in in super-slowmo in HD. I think he even broke wind and THAT is what caused the disallowed goal. You don't have to be in the crease to be called for intereference and therefore waive off a goal, see the actual rule that was already posted. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
toby91_ca 620 Report post Posted May 15, 2008 Look at the rule again. Datsyuk was dumped on the play, he was forced into Turco by a Dallas player, it should have been a goal. The only reason is wasn't was because the whistle blew before the puck went in. Are you talking about the play near the end of the game? If so, it wouldn't have counted anyway as I am not even sure the puck ended up in the net. It wasn't even a close play, it was clearly no goal. Maybe I'm confusing what play you are talking about though. For added reasoning though, Datsyuk went down on his own. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
HoweHatTrick 0 Report post Posted May 15, 2008 You don't have to be in the crease to be called for intereference and therefore waive off a goal, see the actual rule that was already posted. You're right, you don't have to actually be in the crease. But Homer didn't make contact with Turco. The goal should have counted. Unless screening the goalie is now a reason to disallow a goal. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
toby91_ca 620 Report post Posted May 15, 2008 You're right, you don't have to actually be in the crease. But Homer didn't make contact with Turco. The goal should have counted. Unless screening the goalie is now a reason to disallow a goal. You don't have to make contact either. I'm not saying it was the right call, just pointing out the actual rules. As usual during these playoffs, I didn't see the entire game, I was only home for the 3rd period (had my own game again), so I didn't see the play or any replays yet. It was probably a bad call, which happen, it just makes it more magnified when it results in disallowing a goal. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
HoweHatTrick 0 Report post Posted May 15, 2008 Well, the reason I just read on NHL.com that Sutherland gave Babcock, is that "his (Holmstrom's) butt was in the blue". There is no way they make that call on anybody else in the league. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
toby91_ca 620 Report post Posted May 15, 2008 There is no way they make that call on anybody else in the league. Are you able to back up this assertion? I doubt it. I don't get overly worked up over these things as I truly believe Homer plays on the edge and gets away with things just as much as he gets a bad call here and there. I'm sure if you look up the stats, he'll have the most goaltender interference calls in the league, but he is also in that position way more than anyone else either. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
HoweHatTrick 0 Report post Posted May 15, 2008 Are you able to back up this assertion? I doubt it. I don't get overly worked up over these things as I truly believe Homer plays on the edge and gets away with things just as much as he gets a bad call here and there. I'm sure if you look up the stats, he'll have the most goaltender interference calls in the league, but he is also in that position way more than anyone else either. Of course I can't back that up, just the homer in me letting out a little frustration. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Satan81 0 Report post Posted May 15, 2008 Well, the reason I just read on NHL.com that Sutherland gave Babcock, is that "his (Holmstrom's) butt was in the blue". There is no way they make that call on anybody else in the league. It's just another example of Bettmans ridiculous power trip. It's not like this is the first raping of a playoff goal / or disallowed goal that costs games. Does anybody remember the goal that should not have counted in the 1999 Stanley Cup Finals that allowed them to hand (unearned) the Stanley Cup to Dallas. Unfortunately this is not the first incident in this playoffs. Lets not forget that this is not the first time the Wings have been ganked on disallowed goals and Willy Weak Ass calls. When Barry Melrose (Detroit Hater) calls it a bad call, you know that it was a crap call. BETTMAN MUST GO!!!! and THE WAR ROOM IN TORONTO NEED TO PULL THEIR HEADS OUT OF THEIR ASSES!!!!!!!!!!! Pieces Satan81 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
eva unit zero 271 Report post Posted May 15, 2008 It's just another example of Bettmans ridiculous power trip. It's not like this is the first raping of a playoff goal / or disallowed goal that costs games. Does anybody remember the goal that should not have counted in the 1999 Stanley Cup Finals that allowed them to hand (unearned) the Stanley Cup to Dallas. Unfortunately this is not the first incident in this playoffs. Lets not forget that this is not the first time the Wings have been ganked on disallowed goals and Willy Weak Ass calls. When Barry Melrose (Detroit Hater) calls it a bad call, you know that it was a crap call. BETTMAN MUST GO!!!! and THE WAR ROOM IN TORONTO NEED TO PULL THEIR HEADS OUT OF THEIR ASSES!!!!!!!!!!! Pieces Satan81 Wow, someone with the username Satan81 complaining about the 1999 Hull goal? Let me guess, Buffalo deserved the 1999 Cup, even though if you take away the Hull goal they still have only won two games and are a goal away from elimination? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Satan81 0 Report post Posted May 15, 2008 Wow, someone with the username Satan81 complaining about the 1999 Hull goal? Let me guess, Buffalo deserved the 1999 Cup, even though if you take away the Hull goal they still have only won two games and are a goal away from elimination? Actually the Sabres/Stars incident was stated as only an example of the Refs not enforcing the rules. No I'm not saying, with any certainty, that Buff would've gone on to win the cup. My point was that because of a lack of enforcement of the rules in effect at the time the Sabres were denied a chance to win that game and force a game 7 with a win. Gary Bettman has turned the league into a joke and relegated the sport to something that most papers and sports shows consider a waste of time to cover. I love the Wings and live hockey and it absolutely crushes me to see what has happened hockey!!!! By the way, your lack of disgust at whats happened to Hockey and condescension of my example and general attitude towards Hockey speaks volumes of your arrogance in assuming that the cup/game result was my point in my statement. Pieces Satan81 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites