Dan Cleary gets a little redemption

[Gnredwing 10]

If the ref was going to call interference on Dan Cleary I was going to break my tv. Finally Detroit catches a break, as Clearys leg held up Hillers as he tried to make the save. All the ducks were arguing during the next break but as Hiller said after Hossas no goal, "when you play well you deserve the breaks." Huge win tonight, LETS GO WINGS!!!!

[Ms_Hockey 0]

Even if we gave the Ducks that goal back, it's still 3-1 at the end of the game.

Quit your bitchin', quackers.

[titanium2 867]

Even if we gave the Ducks that goal back, it's still 3-1 at the end of the game.

Quit your bitchin', quackers.

Damn. You go girl.

[Guest Four]

We have ALL the momentum right now.

The hockey gods were kind tonight.

[NGKEIB 32]

I was surprised that we got it (considering that Danny O was in the vicinity), but will happily take it. And I hope that if Carlyle or the Ducks start whining that someone throws Hiller's quote in their face.

And could someone remind me what offenses are reviewable by video? I seem to recall reading somewhere that players in the crease was not a reviewable play, but I imagine that goaltender interference might be.

[NGKEIB 32]

Or is it restricted to kick, high stick etc.

[Wingsallwin 0]

I gotta see the goal again on TSN at night or sooner but I think that was a goal. Cleary's feet were surely in the crease but I did not notice any trouble Cleary's feet made on Hiller's movement. If I know correctly, the interference call is made up when any of opponent's player is pushing the goalie and the goalie gets bothered to move left, right, back, or front, whatever direction.

Besides, do not forget that idiot Dan O Halloran waived up like 5 or 6 Wings' obvious goals or the goal we got f***ed up in game 3 at the end. And, we could get more penalties when stupid Getzlaf showed no class on the ice with Perry.

Edited May 10, 2009 by Wingsallwin

[b.shanafan14 733]

I was surprised that we got it (considering that Danny O was in the vicinity), but will happily take it. And I hope that if Carlyle or the Ducks start whining that someone throws Hiller's quote in their face.

And could someone remind me what offenses are reviewable by video? I seem to recall reading somewhere that players in the crease was not a reviewable play, but I imagine that goaltender interference might be.

I believe kicked in goals, high sticks, and whether a puck crossed the line is reviewable. You can't determine interference after the fact, either way. Unfortunately, there is no way to overturn the pathetic show that was the Game 3 tying goal either, and tonight's interference non-call still doesn't even that score as far as I'm concerned, do love the Hiller quote right about now tho

Time for more bitching from Carlyle, I swear he is a combination of Burke and Therrien. Might as well just come out and say "Ok people, nothing about my boys gooning or crashing the net, lets just talk about the chinsy things I want called in comparison to my guys mugging their guys. Seriously, when is Bettman's parity causing, double standard officiating going to kick into an even higher gear, we are obviously still out classed."

[Echolalia 2,961]

Darren Helm went to Holmstrom after he scored and said "thanks for not being on the ice"

[Guest Shoreline]

It was said a long series benefits the Wings. This is being proven correct.

[Doc Holiday 0]

It wasn't interference. Hiller didn't even move before the puck passed him.

[Ms_Hockey 0]

Damn. You go girl.

Thank you, thank you. I'll be here all week.. leave your donations in the hat.

[Drake_Marcus 890]

It wasn't interference. Hiller didn't even move before the puck passed him.

Plus, he'd be using his glove to make that save anyway, if it's a shot on the ice I can see a strong case for interference.

[SouthernWingsFan 854]

I was immediately worrying about any possible goalie interference call for that goal given how many ridiculous phantom interference calls the Wings have gotten against them.

I understand the Ducks beef however.

Flip the teams in this scenario and the Ducks score a goal like this, a lot of people in here would probably be screaming bloody murder though for an interference penalty.

[titanium2 867]

Flip the teams in this scenario and the Ducks score a goal like this, a lot of people in here would probably be screaming bloody murder though for an interference penalty.

People did after Game 3.

[swedishconnection 36]

Thats why its so hard, the fact is that if it was reverse, it would suck. Call the game true, call the game even... Either way the wings come out ahead on this one.

[wmubronco420 25]

well, it was clearly goaltender interference... he blocked hiller from being able to move to the right, if he wouldve been able to slide over like the butterfly goalie he is the puck hits him in the chest. but hey ill take it, payback for game 3

Edited May 11, 2009 by wmubronco420

[Theophany 110]

well, it was clearly goaltender interference... he blocked hiller from being able to move to the right, if he wouldve been able to slide over like the butterfly goalie he is the puck hits him in the chest. but hey ill take it, payback for game 3

Watch the replay again. Even if he couldn't move that way, Hiller made no attempt at the shot because he had no idea where it was.

And no, it wasn't interference. Hiller could still move. Granted, his face probably would have gone into Cleary's crotch, but he still could have moved to get the shot, had he saw it.

[R.Rabbit 0]

Darren Helm went to Holmstrom after he scored and said "thanks for not being on the ice"

[Rivalred 630]

Cleary's leg did not hold up Hiller nor did it keep him from making that save... Hiller barely even moved on that goal. Even though Clearly was in the crease and right behind Hiller.

Anyone else notice that the Ducks have a player named Miller?

Hiller- Miller?

LOL

Edited May 11, 2009 by Rivalred

[HadThomasVokounOnFortSt 878]

Thank you, thank you. I'll be here all week.. leave your donations in the hat.

I will leave mine once we win the series.

[Frozen-Man 144]

Darren Helm went to Holmstrom after he scored and said "thanks for not being on the ice"

[wmubronco420 25]

ill say it again.... that WAS interference, anybody who says it isnt is obviously looking through red and white glasses. Not that theres anything wroing with that

Edited May 11, 2009 by wmubronco420

[uncle ovipositor 6]

I'm surprised that some people here think it wasn't interference. Cleary was in the crease, with his leg behind Hiller's, blocking him from moving. It doesn't matter if Hiller saw the shot or not, the act is what's illegal. Even if no shot is taken, you can't get on top of the goalie like that.

Of course, technically it wasn't interference, since it wasn't called, and the rules are as called on the ice. I don't think the ref was trying to make up for other calls or anything like that, but it worked out about right.

If I were the Ducks I'd be pissed too, but in the end they've earned a lot of non-calls. You want to play that way, you lump it.