egroen 384 Report post Posted January 12, 2010 http://www.philly.com/philly/blogs/frequen...Pittsburgh.html The NHL is investigating Fox Sports Net Pittsburgh for not sending all available camera angles to league headquarters in Toronto for Simon Gagne’s apparent goal that was under review against the Penguins last Thursday, league spokesman Gary Meagher confirmed to the Daily News. FSN Pittsburgh, who had the game’s only video feed, allegedly sent all of the camera angles of the replay except the one that clearly showed the puck over the goal line. I love it! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
zettie85 106 Report post Posted January 12, 2010 Wow. Good job you cheating f***s! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Z and D for the C 712 Report post Posted January 12, 2010 (edited) I hope they make a big deal of this. Edited January 12, 2010 by Z and D for the C Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
EuroTwin 240 Report post Posted January 12, 2010 Wow. Just... wow. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Datsyuk2Zetterberg 1 Report post Posted January 12, 2010 lol. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest scottj Report post Posted January 12, 2010 (edited) whaaa... first the laser pointer guy n then this? s***'s gettin weeeeaaaak (i know the laser pointer wasn't s***tsburgh but i was making a statement about s***ty "fans") Edited January 12, 2010 by scottj Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Miller Brew 0 Report post Posted January 12, 2010 Anyone have the video in question? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest scottj Report post Posted January 12, 2010 it's in the link Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Statts 4 Report post Posted January 12, 2010 (edited) Why does "the war room" not have direct access to all the replays? Edited January 12, 2010 by Statts Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
clutchngrab 12 Report post Posted January 12, 2010 The Las Vegas Strip Poker League (LVSPL) has more integrity than Bettman's abomination. Long live the NHL. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Electrophile 3,554 Report post Posted January 12, 2010 That's ballsy. Totally ******* incompetent.....but ballsy. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Miller Brew 0 Report post Posted January 12, 2010 What's the recourse going to be? I bet nothing. It's gong to be swept under the rug just like Malkin's instigating against Zetterberg in the playoffs. Gonchar probably won't get a suspension for his cheap head shot on Clutterbuck tonight either. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
titanium2 867 Report post Posted January 12, 2010 What's the recourse going to be? I bet nothing. It's gong to be swept under the rug just like Malkin's instigating against Zetterberg in the playoffs. Gonchar probably won't get a suspension for his cheap head shot on Clutterbuck tonight either. It's Bettman's game. Either learn how to play it or go to the KHL. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
King Crane 289 Report post Posted January 12, 2010 This has been happening all season. Apparently there is a new set of "Well, but I intended to" rules that not only overturn rulings, but are more credible than videos and the rest of the rule book. Well, but I intended to blow the whistle (most widely used). Well, but I intended to make the save (popular by McFluery). Well, but I intended to make a clean hit (popular by Pronger). Well, but I intended to beat the Red Wings (popular by...the NHL) Enough of the bulls***. Get some new refs in the NHL and put Bettman's personal minions on the streets. At my house we've kinda made a joke of the whole thing at this point. Whenever something happens in a game we follow it up with but he intended to... My brother once said it during a crappy call at an NFL game, but we ensured him that that rule is only in the NHL Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Third Man In 2,091 Report post Posted January 12, 2010 Why does "the war room" not have direct access to all the replays? I didn't realise either until this happened that they didn't. But apparently Toronto gets its feeds from the local affiliates, and in this case Philadelphia's affiliate (Comcast) didn't carry the game. That's not to say that FSN Pittsburgh purposely withheld the video in this instance, but it does show that the review system is open to shenanigans as well as errors. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Drake_Marcus 890 Report post Posted January 12, 2010 That's ballsy. Totally ******* incompetent.....but ballsy. I agree. Someone's going to lose their job but at least they'll go out for a cause they believe in-- swaying a single regular season hockey game in their favourite team's favour. I hope their kids can eat hockey memorabilia. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Doc Holliday 1,888 Report post Posted January 12, 2010 What's the recourse going to be? I bet nothing. It's gong to be swept under the rug just like Malkin's instigating against Zetterberg in the playoffs. Gonchar probably won't get a suspension for his cheap head shot on Clutterbuck tonight either. Malkin isn't the only one to miss out on a suspension from the instigator, you know. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ShanahanMan 473 Report post Posted January 12, 2010 I hate Pittsburgh so god damn much. The name alone sends chills down my spine. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ltgator333 3 Report post Posted January 12, 2010 http://www.philly.com/philly/blogs/frequen...Pittsburgh.html I love it! Great excuse for incompetence. That was a goal, I saw a cam angle they showed on TV and it was pretty clear, it was the last shot they showed before the game resumed. It was a goal as much as May's was earlier this year. Total load. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
akustyk 84 Report post Posted January 12, 2010 taking into account pure fact, that FSN Pittsburgh aired this very camera angle almost instantly on TV... it sounds to me like a poor excuse of Toronto for f* it up. and yes, I'm tired of this lucky calls/non-calls for Bettman's poster boys. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
LeftWinger 5,131 Report post Posted January 12, 2010 We can expect Bettman to take away the rule that says you have to send all angles to Toronto. He will say that you have a choice to take away the best view and the worst view, stating how much he likes the way most schools allow you to take away the best and worst grade to get your GPA. "This practice works very well with todays youth and we should everything we can to involve todays youth in our game." Ya that sounds very Bettman-like... "It's an instigator penalty? It's a automatic game suspension? Well just take away the penalty then, we can't have him suspended then those nasty Red Wings will go up three games to none and repeat as Champions, then my ugly step child will lose again!!!!!" Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
XxGoWingsxX 0 Report post Posted January 12, 2010 WOW. What did the announcer mean by saying " We saved that one. We had to save that one" ? The article suggests he was saying something wrong there but i'm not quite sure what. My guess is, he said we saved that one as in...we had to keep toronto from seeing that replay. What do you guys think? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
beepbeep 3 Report post Posted January 12, 2010 taking into account pure fact, that FSN Pittsburgh aired this very camera angle almost instantly on TV... it sounds to me like a poor excuse of Toronto for f* it up. and yes, I'm tired of this lucky calls/non-calls for Bettman's poster boys. They never showed the camera angle until AFTER the "no goal" decision was made. The good old NHL, once a call is made NEVER,NEVER change or your dick will fall off........ Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Cicada 4 Report post Posted January 12, 2010 if Pittsburgh FSN did do they, i don't know why they bothered.. it's Pittsburgh for crying out loud.. it's not as if the goal would have been given, even with conclusive proof it went in Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest scottj Report post Posted January 12, 2010 They never showed the camera angle until AFTER the "no goal" decision was made. The good old NHL, once a call is made NEVER,NEVER change or your dick will fall off........ hahaha thanks for the sig Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
