Instead of Overeacting educate yourself on the Facts of Ott's Goal

[brett 1,029]

"Howard, who finished with 29 saves, declined to comment, "because if I say anything, I'm just going to get in trouble."

haha howard!!

Edited January 17, 2010 by brett

[stormboy 47]

You can see that the puck went over the line so it's clearly a good goal. Nice win for Dallas.

I was watching FSN with DVR so I could rewind and slow down. The angle that you describe does not exist on FSN's feed. Can you post screenshots or a video to the angle that you're talking about. Because I have not seen that angle (if it even exists)

I was under the rink and I could see through the floor and ice (with my goggles) that it was a good goal.

i realize everyone's pissed, but can you not see the hilarity in the above posts? thank you, finnish wing, for bringing some levity into this discussion, even if no one else is paying attention.

[BigWillieStyle 662]

I'm starting to think that calls like this are going to start a revival of the glow puck. Or, at least an updated, high tech version of it. I'm sure we would all be in support of such gadgetry. Wouldn't we??

[Guest scottj]

well look at it this way... after the 2 stars incidents we (at least I) will never get our hopes up again when we think we scored/they didn't score... i think we're way past "surprised" with these s***ty calls

It's kinda sad but I'm pretty much expecting this type of s*** to happen

[russianswede919293 95]

I honestly thought it was in...

[SouthernWingsFan 854]

I honestly thought it was in...

After looking at it again and trying not to just be absolutely going apes**t over the call, it's one of those 50-50 calls that could have gone either way. From the angles we got on the TV feed, it certainly didn't look that way IMO. Who knows if Toronto has other looks or not. If we just have those views and angles and if we're going by football rules in replays to where there has to be conclusive evidence to overturn a call, I honestly don't think it should've been called a goal. But maybe replays in the Toronto offices show something different, that'd be my only other logical guess that why Ott's SO goal was good. No other possible camera angles for the fans is what's going to keep this irritating so...

Edited January 17, 2010 by SouthernWingsFan

[9-HoweFan 2]

No. 1 ~ question to ask.... Would this have happened if the "goal" was against Pittsburgh?

No. 2 ~ an average do 50-50 calls like this going against the Wings?

No. 3 ~ why did it take so long to make a decision when the rule is written clearly?

(kind of like the rule about starting a fight in the last minute of a game. which happened during the stanley cup fiinals. ruling defeated league rule that went against the wings.) not bitternes, just building a case

Two undeniable things have happened to the NHL, that have never happened before. Like the NBA, outcomes are controlled more. (and) There are two sets of rules, ones for star players on preferred teams and the people that foul them. Nobody can deny that fact.

So knowing that, you can easily pick the finalists and contenders for the future. Get ready for a steady diet of Southern US teams wining and doing well in the playoffs. A steady diet of US market BIG cities getting breaks. (If you don't think that's true, ask canadian hockey fans what they think of NHL teams moving out of CANADA to go Phoenix and the like.)

Look forward to Chicago v. Pittsburgh Finals for next 10 years or so, Unless Dallas, Los Angeles, Anaheim, San Jose break through.

"You can't without a superstar" is the saying in the NBA. NHL will soon follow, not because their good, but calls will come your way.

- Enjoy the Bettman era.

[cusimano_brothers 1,655]

From HNIC / Hotstove :

The NHL's video replay war room needs to have more authority to take the whistle out of the hands of referees, Hockey Night in Canada analyst Mike Milbury said on Saturday's Hotstove segment.

...

[Firehawk 305]

What about the FACT that we had 6 chances to end the game during the shootout and not one of them came close. Even if it was decided a no-goal, I don't have much confidence that we would've gotten a different outcome.

I hate arguments like this, for the simple fact that they aren't reality. BOTH teams missed on 5 opportunities. That was the situation at the time. It's unfair to say "well we shoulda scored on a previous opportunity and this wouldn't have happened". But it DID happen and was the current situation. Howard was holding them off and Auld was holding the Wings off.

I still do not understand the call really. How can it be a goal when the refs are divided on the ice and a replay cannot see a goal definitively? To me that should be an automatic NO GOAL. Especially when the REFEREE was right on top of it, 3 feet from the puck, and the other refs were down the ice somewhere. It just doesn't make sense to me at all.

[donfishmaster 62]

You can see that the puck went over the line so it's clearly a good goal. Nice win for Dallas.

Are you completely zoned out on LSD? IF ANYTHING, the videos showed CONCLUSIVELY that the puck did NOT go over the goal line...the shot from just inside the blue line to Jimmy's left was the best. THAT'S MY AMAZEMENT... given the rules, how could Toronto NOT overturn the goal, when the video described above showed the puck the entire time it was in the crease and that it NEVER completely crossed the line...not a matter of interpretation, not a matter of inconclusive...it didn't cross.

[Guest Shoreline]

I just dont understand the point of even having a war room in Toronto. If they aren't allowed to overrule a terrible call on the ice about a goal... why do they exist at all?

This. The right call was made, but then overturned by other officials and not the war room. Stupid ass s*** really and the articles criticizing the league and refs as well as analysts is rightful. My guess is they get fined $1,000 - $25,000 for saying anything less than the refs did a stand-up job.

[The Mule 0]

It was the wrong call. We got ass-jacked.

[Vladifan 680]

The NHL could make it real easy by changing the rules/policies. The linesman are not to be able to make any determination or add any opinion on whether there was a goal or no goal. The call by the official closest to the play will stand as the official ruling on the ice unless otherwise proven by video review. A simple fix, IMO.

Waaay too easy, simple and logical.

For whatever reasons, the NHL refs and their bosses have never really seen the need to simplify; to clarify; to investigate or take questionable calls out of the system in any sense. For any reason. Infallibility is their priority. They will never care if us"rabble-rousers" are at the gate, calling for justice. ANY kind of justice. And in time, pro hockey will become just another version of the WWE.

Edited January 17, 2010 by Vladifan

[Guest ZetterbergFourty]

Who's this Ott guy anyways?

[Guest ZetterbergFourty]

Looking at the bigger picture here, supposing that was a no goal call, the next bunch of Wings would have f***ed the shot up and probably lost the game anyways.

[55fan 5,133]

Looking at the bigger picture here, supposing that was a no goal call, the next bunch of Wings would have f***ed the shot up and probably lost the game anyways.

I can handle losing when it is not due to ref incompetence (see today vs Chicago). I don't like it, and I feel sad, deflated, etc., but I don't want to break things and add names to my list of refs to watch.

The Dallas game was poorly officiated all the way through, but the last call cost us the game.

Sure, we could have cost it for ourselves in later rounds, but it didn't happen. The loss was given to us by the refs. Dallas didn't have to earn the win. That's key for me.

[Guest scottj]

he has a crystal ball though so it's cool

[miller76 463]

Gotta love Hollands take on the goal. Though no words, maybe just an action.

Holland Delivers A Message

by Paul on 01/17/10 at 02:40 PM ET

Comments (9)

via Chris McCosky of the Detroit News,

When I asked general manager Ken Holland if he wanted to comment about the controversial shootout goal in Dallas Saturday, he politely declined.

But between the first and second periods Sunday, he cornered an NHL official at the end of the press box and let his feelings be known very clearly. It was an animated, in-your-face, mostly one-sided discussion. Holland was talking and the NHL guy was listening.

From Kuklas Korner

[Guest Howard He Do It?!]

Gotta love Hollands take on the goal. Though no words, maybe just an action.

From Kuklas Korner

Good. Kenny has a lot to be mad about and he should be voicing his displeasure. Saturday's game was a disgrace to the Wings and to the NHL.

[GMRwings1983 8,804]

Gotta love Hollands take on the goal. Though no words, maybe just an action.

From Kuklas Korner

Holland should have brought Brad May and Andreas Lilja with him, just to intimidate the guy some more.

[Dimaline312000 51]

Just thought I'd make this thread to clear up some confusion on Ott's goal so idiots don't freak out at the wrong thing.

Ott's shot was waved off by the Ref, BUT was ruled a goal by the linesmen. Because of this the Warroom had to have CONCLUSIVE PROOF of the puck NOT CROSSING THE LINE, rather than vice versa which we are more accustomed to seeing.

The linesmen got the wrong call, but due to it they actually followed procedure. Blame the linesmen not the War room. I personally think the procedure is f***ed up, but thats for you to decide on your own.

I am not defending the call and saying it is right, merely pointing the blame in the right direction.

Carry on LGW.

I couldn't agree more. I just wanna know when the hell they gave the Linesman power to call goals? Toronto did what it does after that it was the on ice officials to make the call. I don't agree with it at all and I believe we should have not even let it get to the SO but since it did we should have had a goal in the SO before Ott's goal or non goal. We have plenty of guys that can put the puck in the net and none of them did it.

[Hockeytown0001 7,652]

Holland Delivers A Message

by Paul on 01/17/10 at 02:40 PM ET

Comments (9)

via Chris McCosky of the Detroit News,

When I asked general manager Ken Holland if he wanted to comment about the controversial shootout goal in Dallas Saturday, he politely declined.

But between the first and second periods Sunday, he cornered an NHL official at the end of the press box and let his feelings be known very clearly. It was an animated, in-your-face, mostly one-sided discussion. Holland was talking and the NHL guy was listening.

I'd love nothing more than to see a video on that

[Opie 308]

First off all the problem started about 12 shooters before Ott (really after the lockout) A skills competition is the worst way to decide a game with PLAYOFF IMPLICATIONS!

I hate the shoot out, play 10 min 4-4, no goal 10 min 3-3, still no goal untimed 3-3 until it is over!

Something anything has to be better than the shootout.

3 point system needs to go away, instigator needs to go, Trapezoid needs to go, intent to blow the whistle needs to go away, they need to put mini cams in the pipes and cross bars, replay needs to be tweaked, any rule that ends with Referee discration needs to be re-evaluated until the refs can efficiently and effectively follow the game and officiate it, the Refs need a summer camp every year to get better and more on the same page as to what is a hook, trip, goaltender interference, etc...

This league needs some serious tweaking in the off season, or fellow fans we are headed for another lockout or the end of the league. These bulls*** rules that are hitting every team in the league are alienating long time die hard fans, and nothing that I can see is really helping the league get new fans.

Edited January 18, 2010 by Opie

[55fan 5,133]

^Opie, I agree with absolutely every word that you said.^

However, the fact remains that there is a shootout, we didn't get it done in regulation, overtime or the first rounds of the shootout. Dallas did not win the game. The refs gave them a win on a play that decided the game. Had Ott scored a legitimate goal, I would have been disappointed, but I would have gotten over it. (see Det vs Chi 1/17).

The game was won and lost by a bad call, not by the players. Bad calls happen. Refs are human. This call should have been rectified. There was no reason that they could not have gotten it right. That's where my anger comes from.

Maybe they need the refs to look at the replays, decide on a call, then call TO. If the refs can not agree, they need to tell TO that they can't decide and have TO make a decision rather than having to provide conclusive evidence against.

Edited January 18, 2010 by 55fan

[Guest micah]

^Opie, I agree with absolutely every word that you said.^

Me too.

Maybe they need the refs to look at the replays, decide on a call, then call TO. If the refs can not agree, they need to tell TO that they can't decide and have TO make a decision rather than having to provide conclusive evidence against.

I like this idea. I think refs and linesman should all get a vote on each goal - "goal", "I didn't see it", or "no goal". Any time there is a vote for Goal and a vote for no goal the decision should go to Toronto. There should be no "override" clause for the guys in Toronto - they have slow mo and several views, they are usually in a better position to call the play than any official. Coaches should be able to challenge every goal. If you lose a challenge and you have a timeout, you lose your timeout. If you lose a challenge and you don't have a timeout remaining, 2 minute bench minor for delay of game.