50 replies to this topic

[Namtaru]

Refs and Linesmen get together to talk about tuesdays episode of LOST and then they just continue the game.

Seriously though, I'm wondering the same thing. I don't get why they stopped the play.


I agree that a call on Helm from Doan would have been weak. I would not have agreed if I were on the 'yote's side. But a missed 5-on-3 opportunity really irks me.

[Hockeymom1960]

You have to read this. Sorry don't know how to post the article but here's the link.

http://blog.mlive.co...s_voted_to.html

[SouthernWingsFan]

You have to read this. Sorry don't know how to post the article but here's the link.

http://blog.mlive.com/snapshots/2010/04/tsns_dreger_nhls_gms_voted_to.html

I love watching this game and it'll take a lot to change that, but this is just another example of how a lot of rules need to be switched and how painfully loosely defined they are.

What's bad about this is that, at least I sound like a bitter fan or whatever focusing so much on this missed high-stick call and not giving Phoenix credit for the win. They deserved the win, they eventually took the play to Detroit and took care of a business. Blowing an obvious call though there late in the game played a significant result in the game, which is so frustrating that officials had to play a bigger hand in determining the outcome of a game than necessary.

[jenova0]

Simple solution to this problem is to review high-sticking calls where someone is cut. Of course it won't happen.

[F.Michael]

I love watching this game and it'll take a lot to change that, but this is just another example of how a lot of rules need to be switched and how painfully loosely defined they are.

What's bad about this is that, at least I sound like a bitter fan or whatever focusing so much on this missed high-stick call and not giving Phoenix credit for the win. They deserved the win, they eventually took the play to Detroit and took care of a business. Blowing an obvious call though there late in the game played a significant result in the game, which is so frustrating that officials had to play a bigger hand in determining the outcome of a game than necessary.

Remember 2008 game 6 with 3 minutes left in the game?...1 poor call on Hudler followed up by 2 obvious non-calls.

6 Penguins on the ice for some 30 seconds last spring?

How many goals waived off on Homer these past few years?

I'm no conspiracy type, but 1 thing is certain for our beloved Red Wings - they get screwed by the refs more often than not.

[esteef]

Remember 2008 game 6 with 3 minutes left in the game?...1 poor call on Hudler followed up by 2 obvious non-calls.

6 Penguins on the ice for some 30 seconds last spring?

How many goals waived off on Homer these past few years?

I'm no conspiracy type, but 1 thing is certain for our beloved Red Wings - they get screwed by the refs more often than not.

But see, you're not allowed to point out actual examples lest you be thrown in with the tin foil hat wearers.

esteef

[F.Michael]

But see, you're not allowed to point out actual examples lest you be thrown in with the tin foil hat wearers.

esteef

Well...What if my tin foil hat is in the shape of the ?

[Carman]

But see, you're not allowed to point out actual examples lest you be thrown in with the tin foil hat wearers.

esteef

There is a difference between noting bad calls, and then saying the bad calls are directly influenced by the league.

[esteef]

Well...What if my tin foil hat is in the shape of the ?

Even better...



esteef

[hak]

There is a difference between noting bad calls, and then saying the bad calls are directly influenced by the league.

I've noticed a trend here on LGW that alot of people only see black or white. If you are pro something , or argue for something you get ridicoulous generalations from them who argue against the same thing. It's hard for me to express myself because my vocabulary is thin but maybe you understand what I mean? Example, "I think Crosby is the best playmaker in the league; >argument<" , Then some people just answer with a "Yeah Crosby is jesus god and is here to save mankind " instead of actually adress the argument in a civil matter. And then the counterpart counter in the same way and the discussion is ruined. I hate that. People who are pro something goes too far on the pro side while people on the con side goes too far on that side. I wish people had more perspective and self distance. Not saying im innocent in that matter but i think it's a bit of an issue here.

Agree or disagree?

[Dave]

I've noticed a trend here on LGW that alot of people only see black or white. If you are pro something , or argue for something you get ridicoulous generalations from them who argue against the same thing. It's hard for me to express myself because my vocabulary is thin but maybe you understand what I mean? Example, "I think Crosby is the best playmaker in the league; >argument<" , Then some people just answer with a "Yeah Crosby is jesus god and is here to save mankind " instead of actually adress the argument in a civil matter. And then the counterpart counter in the same way and the discussion is ruined. I hate that. People who are pro something goes too far on the pro side while people on the con side goes too far on that side. I wish people had more perspective and self distance. Not saying im innocent in that matter but i think it's a bit of an issue here.

Agree or disagree?

I agree, and we call that going from one extreme to the other.