NHL responds to waved-off goal in Game 3

[OsGOD 3]

The NHL should devise a "smart puck" that links via bluetooth to the refs whistle... when it is in play and not covered the refs Whistle will not work.

if it fails then the league can review the play to see if there was intent (via motioning to the mouth with the whistle/hand)

Edited May 6, 2009 by OsGOD

[Jake Ryan 1]

The problem is that when a whistle is blown players let up. So if the whistle goes before the puck is in the net, you can't do much about that. However, on the disallowed goal tonight, the whistle went after the puck is in the net, so it was the dreaded 'intent to blow' rule. It's one thing if the goalie has the puck covered, the other team is whacking away at it, and it goes in before the ref has the chance to blow the whistle. But when the ref so clearly has it wrong and the puck is in the net before the whistle actually goes, it's ridiculous. It seems like there ought to be some discretion in instances like this and it shouldn't be an unreviewable call.

This is what I don't like. Why couldn't the Referee go over to the scorers table, ask the players to get out of the way, talk to the other 3 officials and the scorers table, get told by the other 3 that the play was AN OBVIOUS GOAL, and go to the REPLAY. He didn't have to use that stupid "intent to blow" garbage. That's what I don't like about all of this. He could have left the "intent to blow" crap in the bag and gone to the scorer's table and reviewed whether or not the puck was across the line when the puck went in. Then he could have explained after the game that his "intent to blow" the whistle happened EXACTLY when he blew the whistle = AFTER the puck was in the net. NOBODY would have argued with any of this. So there are TWO mistakes being made, and that's why the Wings and their fans got SCREWED and have a right to be mad. 1) Bad Call. 2) Bad Judgement. The officials should know how to handle this situation and how to buy more time and manipulate the rules to make sure the CORRECT call gets made. That's why the rules are not black and white in the first place. They've made these rules so that the officials can cover their asses when they make a bad call. That doesn't mean that the officials ONLY have to use this rule to defend THEMSELVES. They should be using the flexibility of this rule to make the right call, not give them an out for being out of position and using poor judgement.

[luvmnger 125]

every team should have a 2 call card each game.

this allows each coach to demand a review of any play. penalty call/no penalty call/goal/no goal/offsides/too many men etc.

now if you win...you win the call if you lose....loss of time out...then delay of game.

its called controlling your destiny.

the refs are far more aware of making the best call they can, every play, and the coaches feel as if they can have a little more control of their situation.

done.

make it happen buttman.

[Chris L 0]

What I don't understand is that when it comes to hooking, interference etc... there is a huge level of subjectivity going on. Yet, when it comes to a play like this then the rules have to be black and white. This was a goal by any hockey standards (if you take Watson out of the equation). No one stopped playing, puck was loose, puck crossed the line before whistle sounded. There is no reason why the NHL cannot do what you suggested. Everyone keeps trying to come up with a black or white solution but there are huge shades of gray in every other aspect of officiating so why can't the top officiating dogs (Toronto) get together and say "That call was BS, I don't care if the ref 'intended' to blow a donkey... that was a goal".

This is no different than anything else in life. The simplest solution always fits. The more complexity you shove into something the less it works. The NHL, since I've started watching hockey in 1995, has become more bloated and bureaucratic with each passing year. It seems like every year I have to learn a new rule. WTF?

The NHL is now, like so many politicians, stuck supporting a losing argument. They know that was a crap call, and they know their ref screwed the pooch. But they can't (or rather, don't want to) question the refs on the ice. But then they do with the video reviews, so nobody knows what to expect. They can disallow a goal but not re-allow a goal? That's foolish. This era of hockey is too boated. If the NHL wants to improve then they should, IMO, toss out the current rule book and go back to something much older and start from there.

Screw this interference B.S. Screw the trapazoid. Screw (inconsistantly) calling every bump and tap a penalty. Hockey is better when the rules are simpler and the players can get out there and play and the refs are allowed to use judgment and context. Plus I don't think the two ref system has ever worked right.

Simple is better, but Betman and his lackeys don't get that.

[b.shanafan14 733]

For once, I just want to hear someone from the league say "that was a terrible call". Its ALWAYS the same BS: "the ref called it the way they are supposed to", "we have the best officials in pro sports", "not a mistake [lengthy explanation of the refs point-of-view]", etc.

Really? I know the NHL under Bettman is some communist state, sans free thinking and admitted short-comings, but we can't even call a MISTAKE a MISTAKE. Everyone is human, except NHL officials, they are infallible if you are asking Bettman.

[Dano33 41]

I don't understand why the play is over when the ref intends to blow the whistle. The players play until they hear a whistle, not until the play was intended to be blown dead. I really think if the puck goes in before the whistle, it should at least be reviewable. Maybe the ref is done, but the players keep going. Last i checked the game is played by the players, not the refs.

[Chris L 0]

every team should have a 2 call card each game.

this allows each coach to demand a review of any play. penalty call/no penalty call/goal/no goal/offsides/too many men etc.

now if you win...you win the call if you lose....loss of time out...then delay of game.

its called controlling your destiny.

the refs are far more aware of making the best call they can, every play, and the coaches feel as if they can have a little more control of their situation.

done.

make it happen buttman.

I like this idea, like the old review of the stick rule. Let the teams challenge a call or two. If they lose then 2 minutes in the box. Simple, fair and can work.

+1 for you.

[FirstSamuel1745 0]

Listen all, I'm as upset as anyone concerning how everything went down last night. But the guy made the right call. When the ref can't see the puck he is to blow it dead. Happens a thousand times throughout the course of the season. I know that doesn't make last night's game any easier to swallow; it doesn't. But it was the right call.

[cusimano_brothers 1,655]

This is pure CYA by the NHL; the only thing missing is the "he got a speck of dirt in his eye" excuse. Just another item for the agenda of the summer meetings.

The new motto of the League could be:

The NHL: We're quick to respond, but slow to react.

[Chris L 0]

Yup. The article in the Free Press says it all.

Wings Blew It, Not Ref

http://www.freep.com/article/20090506/SPOR...lew+it++not+ref

True the wings blew it themselves by sleeping through the first 30 minutes of the game. But still that was a crap call. All we can do is take our lumps and move on. Bad calls happen, refs miss stuff, refs show special treatment to certain players and teams. Life isn't fair no matter how hard we try to make it fair. Its just life.

Maybe this will be thing that gets the Wings interested in competing this spring, cuz I can see that the Wings just don't want it as bad as the Ducks right now. I dunno why, but it seems to have been a thing through the whole season and now here. If we lose this series, that will be why. The Ducks have the will to win, we don't. When the Wings have the will to win for 60 minutes they are unstoppable.

This is the same thing I see year after year when the Wings are in the playoffs -- they defeat themselves. Its weird, I watch other series and I can see other teams out playing another and winning, but rarely do I see a team, besides the Wings, defeat themselves buy not bringing their A game and willpower each night.

[donfishmaster 62]

Having watched this travesty about a dozen times on youtube, the realization of the refs tortured logic became apparent.

"The goal was a good goal. I blew the whistle AFTER the puck crossed the line. The whistle stops play. I stopped play after the puck crossed the line, hence the goal was a good goal. ERGO, AS AN OFFICIAL I ENGAGED IN THE CORRECT ACTION AND THE CORRECT OUTCOME IN THE COURSE OF PLAY WAS THE RESULT.

...but AFTER the correct call and the correct outcome of the play occurred, I decided that I probably INTENDED to make the incorrect call...NOT THAT I DID MAKE THE INCORRECT CALL, just that I probably (in retrospect) decided I INTENDED to make the incorrect call. THEREFORE, I intended to REVERSE the correct call on the correct outcome of the play in order to instill my own perceived incorrect call, thus resulting in the incorrect result of the play AFTER the play is over.

I am therefore--as an official--asserting my authority to override my correct officiating with the correct outcome in order to impose the possibility that I wished to make the incorrect call."

I'm trying to think of analogies to this in the real world but none come to mind.

[hoogs 8]

The thing that bugs me is, how did he know the puck wasn't in the net? He blew the whistle BEFORE he even had a clear view of the entire net. You just CANNOT make that call until you can see the entire net, total BS

[esteef 2,679]

If Crosby had tapped that goal in would it have counted then?

esteef

[Third Man In 2,091]

I think what some people are missing here is that this was the correct call according to the rule book and league instructions to officials. The mistake was in Watson's positioning that caused him to lose sight of the puck, not the call itself.

The 'intent to blow' rule makes sense in that there's a delay between when a ref decides to stop the play and when he can physically blow the whistle. What I disagree with is that the play is unreviewable in instances when the puck is in the net *before* the whistle sounds, and hence the players haven't let up yet. Treat it like a play where there's a question whether the puck is over the goal line or is kicked/tipped with a high stick/etc.--the ref talks with the War Room during the review and explains how he saw the play, and if there's indisputable video (and in this case audio) proof that the puck was never covered and was in the net before the whistle, allow the goal. Otherwise, the call on the ice stands.

[NHLrules? 32]

Why is this the only league with this intent crap?

In the NFL a fumble is reviewable, can you hear the whistle, no, fumble.

Was the QBs are moving forward, no, fumble.

They dont use intent.

Why do these candadian clowns?

[Guest MrSandMan]

Nobody can deny that we got screwed. Hell, both the Ducks AND Pens fans are saying Detroit got screwed... but they are happy we got screwed.

Personally, if Wings won a game this way, I would feel hollow about the win and nervous about the haunting karma for the rest of the series.

Duck fans can't be too proud of their team for refs giving them the game...

[edicius 3,269]

I love how the NHL rep won't even admit that Watson made a mistake. He clearly did. Would go a LONG way to admit a mistake. But nope, that's their story and they're sticking to it. Idiots.

[SuperNovaXll 124]

This is what I don't like. Why couldn't the Referee go over to the scorers table, ask the players to get out of the way, talk to the other 3 officials and the scorers table, get told by the other 3 that the play was AN OBVIOUS GOAL, and go to the REPLAY. He didn't have to use that stupid "intent to blow" garbage. That's what I don't like about all of this. He could have left the "intent to blow" crap in the bag and gone to the scorer's table and reviewed whether or not the puck was across the line when the puck went in. Then he could have explained after the game that his "intent to blow" the whistle happened EXACTLY when he blew the whistle = AFTER the puck was in the net. NOBODY would have argued with any of this. So there are TWO mistakes being made, and that's why the Wings and their fans got SCREWED and have a right to be mad. 1) Bad Call. 2) Bad Judgement. The officials should know how to handle this situation and how to buy more time and manipulate the rules to make sure the CORRECT call gets made. That's why the rules are not black and white in the first place. They've made these rules so that the officials can cover their asses when they make a bad call. That doesn't mean that the officials ONLY have to use this rule to defend THEMSELVES. They should be using the flexibility of this rule to make the right call, not give them an out for being out of position and using poor judgement.

Exactly! I was wondering if no one else thought of this. Does anyone know of a reason why that official would/could not do that?

That was one of the worst officiated games I have ever seen. The call that lead to the Ducks 2nd goal was totally garbage too!! If you think about it, we lost the game by 1 goal, yet got screwed out of two. Could end up being the difference in the series.

The Wings didnt play well by any means, and im not sure they deserved to win the game, however...its pretty bad to loose a game as a direct result of two blown calls.

Outside of that goal a few years back where the puck entered a hole on the outside of the net and the goal counted, this might have been the worst call I have ever seen.

[motorcitykid 42]

It's easy to lose sight of the puck... therefore there's another factor: body language. If the goalie acts like has the puck and you can't see it, blow the whistle... if the goalie is falling on his back while scrambling and you can't see the puck, why the hell would your first reaction be to blow the whistle?

Never once did Hiller act like he had any idea where that puck was.

Exactly what I was talking about this morning. Well said!!

I've never sent an email to the NHL offices EVER, but I did today. I'm sooooo f'n pissed about this still. I'm in such a pissed off mood at work today. Dammit.

[vangvace 12]

Why can't they admit the wrong call was made?

I don't know if I'll be a hockey fan next year if games and series are decided by people wearing black and white and not the players...

In public defend your employees, behind closed doors 2 to the gut. There is no reason for infighting to be laid out for all to see, no matter how much like a disfunctional family the NHL is run.

[DatsyukianDeak 0]

In baseball the rules are simple, Pitchers cannot wear white shirts down to their wrists. The same rule should apply for hockey, but they should not be allowed to wear black pants, pads...etc

[hemitheus 0]

i find this funny "He didn’t make a mistake. In hindsight, if he had a slow-motion camera to review it, he may not have (blown the play dead)." He needed a slow motion camera but everyone else in the arena as well as the millions watching on TV didnt need one.

This non reviewable crap has to go.

I say GOAL

[motorcitykid 42]

but, if they had done that, the Wings might have won. The fact that it was the game tying goal is significant and makes the call a bit harder to accept as valid, especially since it was a wrong call. It was one of the worst calls I've ever seen -- not the worst, but right up there. It didn't cost the Wings the Cup or the series, at least.

Anyway, if the Wings had shown up last night and played for more than ten minutes of the game, it wouldn't have mattered. Lesson learned? We shall see.

Just what I was thinking as I read through this thread and thinking about last nights horrible game all round.

Over to you, Mike. And the boys in the dressing room ...

[wmubronco420 25]

i find this funny "He didn’t make a mistake. In hindsight, if he had a slow-motion camera to review it, he may not have (blown the play dead)." He needed a slow motion camera but everyone else in the arena as well as the millions watching on TV didnt need one.

This non reviewable crap has to go.

I say GOAL

that comment about the slow motion camera pissed me off, i mean you could watch that in fast-forward and still see it clearly.

[Hossa7.4 0]

you know all I can say is there is a thread on another well known hockey board about this topic and 95% of posters believe it was a bad call and the Wings got robbed.

This includes Anaheim fans and even an occational Pittsburgh fan.

Far less here think the same. What a strange thing indeed.