17 replies to this topic

[Crymson]

I found both of these on YouTube and thought it was pretty cool to see them side-by-side:


February 2008: Sharks score off netting:

February 2009: Justice is served:

Edited by Crymson, 27 February 2009 - 04:11 PM.

[Shoreline]

Just beautiful.f****** stupid refs.

I have to agree though with Mickey in the first one -- either make it reviewable or bring the net in play so players don't stop like they did on the first one thinking the play is dead.

Edited by Shoreline, 27 February 2009 - 04:17 PM.

[Mike]

Either you make the play reviewable or you get rid of the netting. No way in hell do I want the net to be in play. That would be the dumbest rule ever.

[Shoreline]

They won't get rid of the netting. What they would do instead of ridding of the netting is make the net in play, so if the puck bounces off the netting and lands back on the ice, it's playable.

Or, make the netting reviewable in the cases of a goal immediately following (like a couple seconds) the puck going off the net like it did in the first video.

I actually think making the net in play would be far easier and wouldn't add a complicated rule to the rulebooks regarding handling reviews.

[Crymson]

I don't think that Sharks fans have much place to be whining on the Wings` goal, given that the Sharks could just as easily have scored on that play as well (before Zetterberg picked up the puck)---it was pretty much in normal play---whereas on the Sharks` goal, they literally scored RIGHT OFF THE NETTING. In that case, it was virtually impossible for Hasek to stop the puck.

[Mike Mann]

yeah I thought that was pretty weak that there could be any complaint by the sharks side that the play was active off the net the other net. They kept possesion of the puck for several secs after the play, even made 1-2 passes with it if I remember correctly.

If anyone had reason to call for the whistle it was us.

Hank just robbed them is all.

[pjgj13]

And to think we could have won the game that night if it wasn't for that goal.

I just don't understand HOW 4 sets of eyes miss something like that. Just like how they miss everything else.

[Gizmo]

Now if we could just figure out a way to recoup the phantom "in the crease" goal wave-offs that Dan O'Halloran's screwed us on in the last couple of years!!!

[dat's sick]

I don't think that Sharks fans have much place to be whining on the Wings` goal, given that the Sharks could just as easily have scored on that play as well (before Zetterberg picked up the puck)---it was pretty much in normal play---whereas on the Sharks` goal, they literally scored RIGHT OFF THE NETTING. In that case, it was virtually impossible for Hasek to stop the puck.

Yeah, on Z's goal, the bounce off the netting and back into play without a whistle actually was a beneficial call for the Sharks, since they got to keep pressure in the zone instead of getting a stoppage in play and allowing the Wings to get fresh legs onto the ice. The fact that Z managed to steal the puck and do a great individual effort and score had nothing to with the puck going up into the netting. We could just as easily have been sitting here with 2 youtube videos of almost identical Sharks' goals and complaining about how the refs shafted us 2 times on netting goals.

[Shoreline]

On the first one Ken Daniels had pointed out a ref had brought his whistle up to his mouth, indicating he likely saw the puck go up into the netting, but didn't even blow it out of play. I gotta say they sure took bulls*** rather easily in that case. I dunno how I'd remain calm even as an announcer if I saw refs pull s*** like that.

[Crymson]

And to think we could have won the game that night if it wasn't for that goal.

I just don't understand HOW 4 sets of eyes miss something like that. Just like how they miss everything else.

Well, fortunately we still ended up winning the Stanley Cup.

[henrik40]

Now if we could just figure out a way to recoup the phantom "in the crease" goal wave-offs that Dan O'Halloran's screwed us on in the last couple of years!!!

He's already been shot once in Detroit, maybe someone will do it again except for this time he won't make it out of Detroit.



Disclaimer: I do not promote gun violence unless it's towards Dan O'Halloran (just kidding, but not really)

[Grim]

can't they put more slack in the netting... to minimize the chances the puck will fly back out??

[SouthernWingsFan]

Just beautiful.f****** stupid refs.

I have to agree though with Mickey in the first one -- either make it reviewable or bring the net in play so players don't stop like they did on the first one thinking the play is dead.

Sometimes you miss stuff during play. S**t happens. I'm not going to hold these against the refs and it's pretty much a given that almost every game is not going to be called consistently. You are going to miss stuff sometimes. I'm 100% in agreement though that IF they miss stuff like this, it needs to be reviewable. And for these 2 specific instances if that happened, neither team should've had a goal.

[RedWingedKitten]

It should at the very least be reviewable. The difference between the two goals is that Zs goal was alllll skill, where as the Sharks goal was pure dumb luck.

That's the only way the Sharks can beat us! Arrrr!

[Ms_Hockey]

Excuse my French, but revenge is a mother f*****.

[softshoes]

Excuse my French, but revenge is a mother f*****.

It's ok I speak French

[cusimano_brothers]

I don't why the League insists on hiring visually impaired on-ice officials.