PHI @ PIT

[germanwing 154]

http://video.nhl.com/videocenter/console?hlg=20092010,2,649

Have a look at 04:58 to 06:03!

Why isn´t it a goal?

[thedisappearer 291]

Wow. Just wow.

[Carman 387]

You can't see the puck, and the officials cannot assume to know where the puck is.

Not a big deal.

[RedWingsRox 614]

Final score ... should be 8-4 Philly ...

[Mr.Macphisto 2]

Wow, how did they miss this? I can totally understand how the refs on ice could have, but when reviewed in Toronto @6:14? To some, it’s no big deal; to most others…..it’s getting pretty typical I guess. Pretty clear it was a goal.

[thedisappearer 291]

You can't see the puck, and the officials cannot assume to know where the puck is.

That's why Toronto looked at it. Whistle blew after the puck went in.

Not a big deal.

FAIL

You can accept horrible officiating followed by pathetic league intervention. The rest of us who love hockey want it done right.

[Carman 387]

It's not a big deal, Philly had the game in the bag with/without that goal. It's a very close call, and I don't think it's that devastating of a mistake even if it was a mistake in the first place.

[edicius 3,269]

Big deal or not, it's still an obvious screw-up...and once again, a screw-up that favors Pittsburgh. The officials could be a LITTLE less obvious. They already give them the most PPs in the league - though with a PP as inept as theirs, thankfully it doesn't matter.

[jollymania 162]

that was a disgustingly bad call, there was another instance in the game where crosby held someone and the ref clearly put his arm up, but when the pens touched the puck they just played on and the ref put his hand down, it was obvious that he put his hand up towards crosby as it was around the red line, it couldn't have been for any other reason, the otehr guy clearly had the puck and crosby was grabbing on to him.

[Blueliner 69]

Final score ... should be 8-4 Philly ...

It actually should have been 8-3. Crosby's goal shouldn't have happened. Malkin was offsides at the blue line. He didn't have full control of the puck when his feet crossed the line before the puck.

[PrairieDawg 52]

It certainly adds to the conspiracy theorists when almost all of these no-goal calls that were actually goals happen against the Pens. I mean seriously, have they had like 3 or 4 of these now?

[Carman 387]

Good teams make their own luck. Stay classy.l

Crosby>

[akustyk 84]

It actually should have been 8-3. Crosby's goal shouldn't have happened. Malkin was offsides at the blue line. He didn't have full control of the puck when his feet crossed the line before the puck.

that's what I though, too. but I haven't had a chance to see the replay on Pittsburg stream so

my opinion is not conclusive. it seemed pretty clear though

EDIT: it's in the same replay as above. offside as hell...

how does this not surprise me...

Edited January 8, 2010 by akustyk

[Drake_Marcus 890]

Good teams make their own luck. Stay classy.l

Crosby>

It's hard to argue with you when your inequality is missing a term...

[miksteri 55]

Disallowed so crosbys pens wouldnt get humiliated.

[XxGoWingsxX 0]

Yeah i don't know why that would be a non goal. You clearly see the puck IN THE NET on top of fleury's pad and he grabs it with his trapper and brings it out of the net.

[Berry 2]

if the officials cannot see the puck after the red line they can't allow the goal (fundamental hockey's rule)...

[Wing Across The Pond 196]

Yeah i don't know why that would be a non goal. You clearly see the puck IN THE NET on top of fleury's pad and he grabs it with his trapper and brings it out of the net.

By this time it was Johnson, Fleury was awful as were the Pens in general. Its a joke though that the one reply that conclusively shows its a goal, is the one they don't use in the review. Did Toronto even have that angle? Or was that just the broadcasters own angle? If so the officials need all the angles so they can make a call.

[edicius 3,269]

It actually should have been 8-3. Crosby's goal shouldn't have happened. Malkin was offsides at the blue line. He didn't have full control of the puck when his feet crossed the line before the puck.

Agreed, though we've seen that happen with the Pens before, haven't we? Blown offside calls in their favor, goals taken away from the opposition, most powerplay opprtunities in the league...come on, Bettman, you used to be more stealthy than this.

[Wings_Dynasty 267]

Agreed, though we've seen that happen with the Pens before, haven't we? Blown offside calls in their favor, goals taken away from the opposition, most powerplay opprtunities in the league...come on, Bettman, you used to be more stealthy than this.

He is. You didn't mention the part with him running underneath the ice with a puck-magnet so he must be doing something right.

[b.shanafan14 733]

At first I was thinking, "whats the big deal" until that last shot. Clearly a goal, no real way to overturn the decision on the ice really, but clearly a goal.

[edicius 3,269]

He is. You didn't mention the part with him running underneath the ice with a puck-magnet so he must be doing something right.

I KNEW IT!

[Vladifan 680]

http://video.nhl.com/videocenter/console?hlg=20092010,2,649

Have a look at 04:58 to 06:03!

Why isn´t it a goal?

Don't have time to watch this, but if it might have been a Penguin's goal, no way it's good. If it could have been a Philly goal, butofcourse it was good.

[Travis 576]

The shot at 6:13 is pretty conclusive, but every thing up until that point isn't worthy of overturning the on-ice call. Perhaps Toronto didn't get that shot? Hard to say, really.

Either way, I too am having a hard time getting worked up about it. Not a huge deal, didn't affect the outcome of the game - though you could obviously argue that it potentially could have.

But I digress.

[Hockeytown0001 7,652]