Antilles328 0 Report post Posted November 19, 2009 Granted there have been bad calls in bigger games. OSU vs. Miami 4th down pass interference in college football. Brett Hull stealing Hasek's cup a few years back. But the call from last night in inexplicable. I understand when there isn't conclusive video proof. I understand when the puck slowly trickles in and the ref blows the whistle because the puck appeared coverd. The shot didn't "trickle" over the goal line. There was nothing obstructing the view. The puck was shot and it went in the net. There was no point between when he shot it and when it went in the goal that would have You can say you lost sight of the puck and meant to blow the whistle but there was no time in which the puck was not visible and not in the net. Watching the video there is absolutely no possible way to say that it wasn't a goal. There is no technicality that makes it a goal in everything but the scoresheet. It's mind boggling. Shot. Goal. It's the simpliest call I've ever seen go to video replay. And they get it wrong! The only way he could have meant to blow the whistle would be to say that he meant to blow the whistle before the shot was taken. Which makes no sense. In the long run it won't matter but still Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Z and D for the C 712 Report post Posted November 19, 2009 THis entire "blow the wistle when the ref can't see the puck" is the problem. It's a ******* ridiculous concept. There should at least be a 5 second wait. Video review also needs to be allowable in ALL cases, along with penalties being able to be reversed. So many things are wrong with the reffing. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
One4TheWings 11 Report post Posted November 19, 2009 204 comments on this already.. right here: http://www.letsgowings.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=61701 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
esteef 2,679 Report post Posted November 19, 2009 I'm gonna start a new thread about it too! esteef Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mmamolo 287 Report post Posted November 19, 2009 In all fairness that thread is about conspiracy vs competancy. But it did veer towards that topic. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
esteef 2,679 Report post Posted November 19, 2009 In all fairness that thread is about conspiracy vs competancy. But it did veer towards that topic. Fairness? On this board? Are you lost? esteef Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
toby91_ca 620 Report post Posted November 19, 2009 Not so sure it was a ridiculously blown call. I mean, there was only 1 person in the entire building who thought it was a goal right away....actually, he might not have reacted right away either. I think the problem is with the rules. I can understand if the ref blew the whistle and then the puck went in, even if the whistle shouldn't have been blown, these things happen, people screw up, it's natural, you can't count something that came after a whistle, even if the whistle shouldhn't have been blown. HOWEVER, what happened last night, to me, its clear that they should have been able to rule that a goal and the problem is with the rules, not the refs. Of course the refs will make mistakes, but you can't try to 100% fix that, because mistakes will always be made. You need to fix the rule first. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Antilles328 0 Report post Posted November 19, 2009 Not so sure it was a ridiculously blown call. I mean, there was only 1 person in the entire building who thought it was a goal right away....actually, he might not have reacted right away either. I think the problem is with the rules. I can understand if the ref blew the whistle and then the puck went in, even if the whistle shouldn't have been blown, these things happen, people screw up, it's natural, you can't count something that came after a whistle, even if the whistle shouldhn't have been blown. HOWEVER, what happened last night, to me, its clear that they should have been able to rule that a goal and the problem is with the rules, not the refs. Of course the refs will make mistakes, but you can't try to 100% fix that, because mistakes will always be made. You need to fix the rule first. But where in the rules does it say that it isn't a goal? Was it determined to be non-reviewable? I read the article on NHL.com and I saw mention of "Intent to Blow the Whistle" but that doesn't make sense given the video evidence. He lost sight of the puck because it was in the net. That's where it went. Unless he lost sight of it before May shot it. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
plopster 136 Report post Posted November 19, 2009 (edited) From the explanation on nhl.com from dum dum mike murphy, he is pretty much telling me the ref blew the whistle and it was already dead because of the intent. which means he must have intended to blow it while may was in the middle of the shot. if thst is the case, it is a horrible call. the only other case is that he lost sight of it going in the goal. we all know that would be because the goalie stopped it with his foot in the net. so you are telling me he stopped the play and called it a dead puck because he saved it behind the goal line. I swear if I saw that man in public I would stab him. that call was worse than the tuck rule they pulled on the raiders back in 2001. whats even worse is the NHL will not admit it was a blown call and they should have reviewed in toronto. I don't care what call was made on the ice. I know damn well the guys in toronto saw that replay and should have said in this case you are wrong, brad may just shot the puck in the net past the goalie. It is a goal. I can't believe babcock didn't come uncunted all over that guy. UNBELIEVABLE Edited November 19, 2009 by plopster Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Echolalia 2,961 Report post Posted November 19, 2009 (edited) There was no intent to blow the whistle. Even stretching the concept of intent to blow in this situation wouldn't explain why there was such a long pause between the goal being scored and the whistle going. If the ref blew the whistle just after the puck went into the net, then maybe I could buy the intent to blow the whistle thing, but the puck was clearly in the net for a good 2.5 seconds before any whistle was blown. The intent to blow the whistle rule is just a way for refs to cover up potential mistakes and they abuse that rule. Edit: Also a little proof that there was no intent to blow the whistle until the puck was already in the net. You can see the ref's head follow the puck throughout the play, and once the puck is in the net the ref skates to the net and blows the whistle. Notice that the whistle was already at his mouth the entire time, so all it would take to blow the whistle would be a change from breathing through the nose to breathing through the mouth. That takes about two tenths of a millisecond. The only possible explanation for this is that the ref incorrectly assumed that the puck was slowly trickling into the net and during that imagined process the ref also assumed that he thought of blowing whistle before the puck went in. Except the puck was already in the net the entire time. Then he states, "No goal, intent to blow the whistle. What Toronto says and what any instant replay says is now officially irrelevant." Edited November 19, 2009 by Echolalia Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DMAC 25 18 Report post Posted November 19, 2009 i want to be a ref in the NHL now and ref the penguin games. just to piss bettman off and call off one of crosbys goal and see how he likes it. i just have no idea how they could call the goal off, clearly it was in the net and 3 seconds later he blows the whistle. can anyone explain to me what intent to stop the play means, espiecially since the puck was by the hash marks Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
WpgMikos 17 Report post Posted November 19, 2009 But where in the rules does it say that it isn't a goal? Was it determined to be non-reviewable? I read the article on NHL.com and I saw mention of "Intent to Blow the Whistle" but that doesn't make sense given the video evidence. He lost sight of the puck because it was in the net. That's where it went. Unless he lost sight of it before May shot it. I talked about this on the other thread and in a blog posting, but unfortunately the moment the ref uses word intent, the conversation is over. 32.2 Disputes – The Referees shall have general supervision of the game and shall have full control of all game officials and players during the game, including stoppages; and in case of any dispute, their decision shall be final. As there is a human factor involved in blowing the whistle to stop play, the Referee may deem the play to be stopped slightly prior to the whistle actually being blown. The fact that the puck may come loose or cross the goal line prior to the sound of the whistle has no bearing if the Referee has ruled that the play had been stopped prior to this happening. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PRStoetzer 1 Report post Posted November 20, 2009 May was not credited with a shot and Auld was not credited with a save on this play. The play officially ended with Abdelkader's shot at 13:56 that was frozen by Auld. Was that the call? That LaRue lost sight of the puck on Abdelkader's shot and that May's shot didn't even happen? http://www.nhl.com/scores/htmlreports/20092010/PL020295.HTM Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SweWings 45 Report post Posted November 20, 2009 I think I'm gonna start a prediction thread concerning how many threads on this topic that will be started in the next 10 days. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DMAC 25 18 Report post Posted November 20, 2009 I think I'm gonna start a prediction thread concerning how many threads on this topic that will be started in the next 10 days. four of them started. is that a record or something now? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BuckeyeWingsfan80 209 Report post Posted November 20, 2009 Granted there have been bad calls in bigger games. OSU vs. Miami 4th down pass interference in college football. Kinda like this, but that PI was legit. and had the same ref called an even more obvious mugging late in the 4th quarter, Ohio State runs out the clock and OT never happens. Just sayin.... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
LeftWinger 4,963 Report post Posted November 20, 2009 This is nowhere NEAR as bad as ricinding an instigator penalty! This goal has no bearing on us winning the Stanley Cup, Malkin should have been suspended, cut and dry, the rule is black and white. It was Malkin's intent to send a message, that is why the ref gave him the instigator, but the NHL felt it more important to steal the Cup away from Detroit. Without Malking in game 3, Wings win, goup 3-0 and win it in 5....The NHL proves time and time again that it rules on its own agenda, not by what is right. It's unfortunate that the Wings are 9 times out of 10 the victims of their agenda, I guess that is what you get for being the BEST NHL team in the world for the past 20 years! It's sad too, because Mike Illitch has generated so much revenue for the NHL, you would think he would eventually get upset with constantly getting screwed... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
edicius 3,269 Report post Posted November 20, 2009 May was not credited with a shot and Auld was not credited with a save on this play. The play officially ended with Abdelkader's shot at 13:56 that was frozen by Auld. Was that the call? That LaRue lost sight of the puck on Abdelkader's shot and that May's shot didn't even happen? http://www.nhl.com/scores/htmlreports/20092010/PL020295.HTM We are at war with Eastasia. We have always been at war with Eastasia. Basically. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
KillerB14 2 Report post Posted November 20, 2009 May was not credited with a shot and Auld was not credited with a save on this play. The play officially ended with Abdelkader's shot at 13:56 that was frozen by Auld. Was that the call? That LaRue lost sight of the puck on Abdelkader's shot and that May's shot didn't even happen? http://www.nhl.com/scores/htmlreports/20092010/PL020295.HTM That makes sense after the fact. No way they can credit May with a shot because the puck went right in off the shot. That would be openly admitting the ref decided to blow the play dead after May shot it before it crossed the line since it went right in. More proof how terrible the call was and even more terrible the cover up. Abdelkader shot at 13:40. LaRue was standing in the corner. The puck was with May and Daley covering him, they both were reacting to the puck. LaRue was watching those two, May backhanded a shot. Ken Daniels called the play. As soon as the shot was on net the LaRue skated to the net and blew the whistle. Clock stopped at 13:36. FOUR seconds after Abdelkader shot the puck. LaRue reacted to May's shot by skating towards the net. He did not react to Abdelkader's shot at all. Is the league really saying four seconds after a shot was taken the ref decided to finally blow the whistle to a play he already had the intent to stop four seconds earlier? I love this league. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Antilles328 0 Report post Posted November 20, 2009 Kinda like this, but that PI was legit. and had the same ref called an even more obvious mugging late in the 4th quarter, Ohio State runs out the clock and OT never happens. Just sayin.... Sorry, I'm not a Buckeye fan and I absolutely HATE Miami. But that call was one of the worst calls I've ever seen. There was NO pass interference at any point in the play (especially nothing that a still poster could show) and the ref threw the flag. Go watch the replay again. The OSU receiver can bring both hands freely up to the ball, there is no body contact and he just doesn't make the catch. There isn't any contact until the ball hits him in the hands and the ref takes about 10 seconds to throw the latest flag I have ever seen in any football game ever. Maybe he had intent to throw the flag. Worst call I've ever seen in such a critical juncture. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mackel 681 Report post Posted November 20, 2009 Just imagine if the wings miss the playoffs or a higher seed in the playoffs by a point or two... how big will this non sense be then? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dicksmack 33 Report post Posted November 20, 2009 Not so sure it was a ridiculously blown call. I mean, there was only 1 person in the entire building who thought it was a goal right away....actually, he might not have reacted right away either. I think the problem is with the rules. I can understand if the ref blew the whistle and then the puck went in, even if the whistle shouldn't have been blown, these things happen, people screw up, it's natural, you can't count something that came after a whistle, even if the whistle shouldhn't have been blown. HOWEVER, what happened last night, to me, its clear that they should have been able to rule that a goal and the problem is with the rules, not the refs. Of course the refs will make mistakes, but you can't try to 100% fix that, because mistakes will always be made. You need to fix the rule first. It was a clear mistake by the ref--they don't come much more obvious than that. The video review is intended to assist with difficult calls but as you say, this can't happen with that utterly absurd rule in place which allows the ref to say he intended to blow the whistle. This rule needs to go. It should be changed such that with a video replay, if the puck is fully across the goal line before the whistle is heard, it's a goal, period. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Nightfall 871 Report post Posted November 20, 2009 Just imagine if the wings miss the playoffs or a higher seed in the playoffs by a point or two... how big will this non sense be then? In an 82 game season, if you miss the playoffs by 1-2 points, there are going to be many opportunities that a team can look back on. Most of them will be within their control. If they just had worked harder on this game or that game. The teams that bring it every night look on a situation like this, shrug, and play the next game. Teams that have no fortitude or work ethic look at this game and ***** about it for 2-3 weeks. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gizmo 21 Report post Posted November 20, 2009 (edited) May was not credited with a shot and Auld was not credited with a save on this play. The play officially ended with Abdelkader's shot at 13:56 that was frozen by Auld. Was that the call? That LaRue lost sight of the puck on Abdelkader's shot and that May's shot didn't even happen? http://www.nhl.com/scores/htmlreports/20092010/PL020295.HTM If that's the line they're expecting us to buy, then I think we need a "statute of limitation" on the "intent to blow" rule. If you can't blow the whistle within 5 seconds of when you meant to then the play continues. Edited November 20, 2009 by Gizmo Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
NGKEIB 32 Report post Posted November 20, 2009 This one is worse: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=64OC-wpsMKg Share this post Link to post Share on other sites