• Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

Hockeytown0001

WCSF Game 3 GDT: Sharks 4 at Red Wings 3

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

if that goes off the toe of his skate i agree, BUT it hit the back half of his skate and the motion of this foot was perpendicular to the direction of the puck. its simple physics, he didnt "kick" it in. how about we just say any puck that hits an offensive players foot and goes directly into the net is no goal. i feel that makes 1000% more sense. jesus.

we have to beat Toronto AND San Jose in this series.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cue the phonecalls from my dumbass friends in the Bay Area who like to rub in every little positive Shark occurrence. They actually had the gall after the last game to say that the refs were spot-on with their calls and the VS. announcers were kissing the Wings' asses.

that's gotta suck.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

if that goes off the toe of his skate i agree, BUT it hit the back half of his skate and the motion of this foot was perpendicular to the direction of the puck. its simple physics, he didnt "kick" it in. how about we just say any puck that hits an offensive players foot and goes directly into the net is no goal. i feel that makes 1000% more sense. jesus.

we have to beat Toronto AND San Jose in this series.

I never thought of it in that way. Hmmm.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Howard He Do It?!

I'm loving the physicality from Stuart this series.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Had it been a DISTINCT kicking motion, they should have seen that rightaway. If it takes five minutes, it's not distinct.

Not to mention, the call on the ice was goal. Say what you want about "right call" or not, that was hardly "indisputable proof" of a "distinct kicking motion".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

if that goes off the toe of his skate i agree, BUT it hit the back half of his skate and the motion of this foot was perpendicular to the direction of the puck. its simple physics, he didnt "kick" it in. how about we just say any puck that hits an offensive players foot and goes directly into the net is no goal. i feel that makes 1000% more sense. jesus.

we have to beat Toronto AND San Jose in this series.

We had to do that last year vs Anaheim

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now