Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Lidstrom hi-stick incident


  • Please log in to reply
50 replies to this topic

#41 Namtaru

Namtaru

    Rookie

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 121 posts
  • Location:Chicago, IL

Posted 16 April 2010 - 01:15 AM

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

:lol:


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.

#42 Hockeymom1960

Hockeymom1960

    Legend

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,224 posts

Posted 16 April 2010 - 05:25 AM

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

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

#43 SouthernWingsFan

SouthernWingsFan

    Legend

  • HoF Booster
  • 24,609 posts
  • Location:Mandeville, Louisiana (Greater New Orleans area)

Posted 16 April 2010 - 05:47 AM

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

http://blog.mlive.co...s_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.

#44 jenova0

jenova0

    2nd Line Scorer

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 503 posts

Posted 16 April 2010 - 06:55 AM

Simple solution to this problem is to review high-sticking calls where someone is cut. Of course it won't happen.
"You either get it, or you don't" - Dr. Phil

#45 F.Michael

F.Michael

    Old School Dynamic Duo

  • HoF Booster
  • 7,522 posts
  • Location:Wisconsin

Posted 16 April 2010 - 10:40 AM

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.

'Evolution' created by Offsides

#46 esteef

esteef

    Legend

  • HoF Booster
  • 8,874 posts

Posted 16 April 2010 - 02:54 PM

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
"The Wings haven't won a Cup without Darren McCarty since 1955."

#47 F.Michael

F.Michael

    Old School Dynamic Duo

  • HoF Booster
  • 7,522 posts
  • Location:Wisconsin

Posted 16 April 2010 - 02:59 PM

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 :stanley: ?

'Evolution' created by Offsides

#48 Carman

Carman

    Legend

  • HoF Booster
  • 5,114 posts
  • Location:Riverview, MI

Posted 16 April 2010 - 03:00 PM

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.

#49 esteef

esteef

    Legend

  • HoF Booster
  • 8,874 posts

Posted 16 April 2010 - 03:06 PM

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

Even better...

Posted Image

esteef
"The Wings haven't won a Cup without Darren McCarty since 1955."

#50 hak

hak

    1st Line Sniper

  • Gold Booster
  • 840 posts
  • Location:Sweden

Posted 16 April 2010 - 03:11 PM

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 :rolleyes:" 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?

#51 Dave

Dave

    1st Line All-Star

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,177 posts
  • Location:Chesapeake, Virginia

Posted 16 April 2010 - 03:24 PM

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 :rolleyes:" 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.





Similar Topics Collapse

0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users