Unbelievably bad goal.

[esteef 2,679]

Conspiracy or not, you have to note a correlation between bad calls and game outcomes no?

Conspiracy or not, you have to note a correlation between bad calls and popular or large market teams no?

Conspiracy or not, you have to recognize that the league makes a ton more money when they have large market or popular teams advance no?

Now anyone with an actual education knows that correlation does not equal causality... but it does make an educated person want to form hypothesis and test them. Investigate, or at least bring it to the attention of the world.

I am saying out and out the league plans who wins, I just think there are too many coincidences going on here with bad calls. There is undoubtedly some major correlation going on.

The business argument makes the most sense to me, and we all know businessmen are not well known for their ethics. I hypothesize that the league simply makes it well known what the best scenarios are, and the instructions are in the absolute worst case scenario where a call is as close as possible, error on the side of profit. Is that really such a far-fetched scenario?

I also feel like there are times, and this is apparent both in series as well as in games, that the whistles are put away to allow more competition. I think that this correlation of not making calls on teams that are too far behind happens enough to suggest the league knows the power of officiating, and how it can be used to make the product better. That is to say, affect the course of the game for a more dramatic form.

Do they get in a room and say, we are going to steal games 2 and 5 for this team? No way, because that would ruin the sport faster than anything. However, if the league knows what is best, and the refs do as well, they can without saying a word make the close calls go one way. Really it can be as little as one call that changes the entire game or series. I could site many games. We all know about Homer, we all know about the Pens, we all know about Chicago and Nashville. It happens to many more teams as well.

Conspiracy or not, that has to be happening. It just seems to happen far too often. I also think we should recognize that is has happened in our favor over the years as well. The NHL is run clean 99% of the time, and they make mistakes like humans do. Combine the two and you have a great tapestry of mistakes, and an indistinguishable duo of frustrating failure. This leaves many fans crying conspiracy, and a much greater number crying prove it.

No one can, unless someone speaks up. Conspiracy or no, we have to deal with these bad calls. I just use my education to suggest that their are correlations we should investigate.

Agree. It's not some grand scheme devised at the beginning of the season that has to be precisely played out all year, it's calls when you need them (Chicago, San Jose), non-calls when you need them (6 Penguins on the ice), non-suspensions when you need them (Malkin), goals waved off (Homer) that can, as you said turn an entire game or series. It's really as simple as that. And the "story of the year" teams seem to get those frequently in their quests for the Cup. But as soon as you point these simple facts out you start getting the tin foil hat bulls***. It happens all the damned time.

esteef

Edited April 8, 2011 by esteef

[Doc Holliday 1,888]

Not saying it can, But I am not saying it can't. But you interpret the rule the same as I do.

There is no stipulation saying it can't be deflected off the goal post or piece of lost equipment

laying on the ice. The puck clearly was NOT kicked INTO the goal. It was kicked tho.....

In some situations I wish the officials in all sports had to be held accountable for their actions to the fan base.

Explain how, what, and why.

The puck wasn't kicked into the goal because it never crossed the line.

If Hossa was awarded that goal he would have kicked it into the net and would have been the last player to have had hit the puck. There is no precedent for allowing kicked in goals that hit the post or abandoned sticks. If there was an exception they would have stated such.

[Hockeytown_Ryan 119]

The puck wasn't kicked into the goal because it never crossed the line.

If Hossa was awarded that goal he would have kicked it into the net and would have been the last player to have had hit the puck. There is no precedent for allowing kicked in goals that hit the post or abandoned sticks. If there was an exception they would have stated such.

Last time I checked the goal counted. if it actually crossed or not is irrelevant at this point.

The kicking motion alone should of negated that goal IMHO. it never should of gotten to the point of "Did it cross"

I have said it before.. They did NOT get it right...I am trying to see what they saw and trying to figure out what

they called that on.

There are alot of people here that HATE the Refs and the inconsistancy of the calls. understandably so.

But is it possible that the people who made the rules, know the interpretations of them slightly better than the fan base of the

NHL? THEY saw something that the rule(s)that allowed that goal. Its not ALWAYS "Stupid People".

Although this instance is VERY hard to argue that point.

I am not playing Devils advocate here as I have been accused of doing. I am guilty of trying to

investigate the rules, interpretations and uses of those rules to try and figure out "What the F*%K they were thinking"

that does not make me a advocate for the officials...It makes me a confused fan looking for some kind of logic in this.

Edited April 8, 2011 by Hockeytown_Ryan

[RusDRW 155]

I hate penalty complaint s***. Seriously. Waah, they had more power plays the refs gave it to them! Stuff like that. Yes, there are bad calls sometimes. But refs generally get things right. My only major beef is the apparent tendency to try and call it "even" every game, when it often clearly isn't. It's sort of the reverse; by not giving the cleaner team more power plays, you are making it uneven in favor of the dirtier team. If they're even and should be, great.

As for the SJ series... on par is hardly accurate. Yes, the Wings had a hard time maintaining momentum due to penalties. But ultimately the Sharks played better hockey.

Partly agree with you. Well, if they get rid of trying to even games I would be almost satisfied. Almost...

Concerning SJS series. This thread is devoted to a game in which momentum perhaps (leave some chances for play-offs desire) decided the outcome. The rest is "what if" game... If they didn't call some phantom penalties what should have happened? And remember that this is hockey where a team playing <b>slightly</b> better does not necessarily win.

PS What if that Hossa's "goal" was disallowed and Blues scores to make it 3-0? If Hawks make the play-offs and advance further I hope they make commercial saying something like "what if we correctly officiated that game?"

[Doc Holliday 1,888]

Last time I checked the goal counted. if it actually crossed or not is irrelevant at this point.

The kicking motion alone should of negated that goal IMHO. it never should of gotten to the point of "Did it cross"

I have said it before.. They did NOT get it right...I am trying to see what they saw and trying to figure out what

they called that on.

There are alot of people here that HATE the Refs and the inconsistancy of the calls. understandably so.

But is it possible that the people who made the rules, know the interpretations of them slightly better than the fan base of the

NHL? THEY saw something that the rule(s)that allowed that goal. Its not ALWAYS "Stupid People".

Although this instance is VERY hard to argue that point.

I am not playing Devils advocate here as I have been accused of doing. I am guilty of trying to

investigate the rules, interpretations and uses of those rules to try and figure out "What the F*%K they were thinking"

that does not make me a advocate for the officials...It makes me a confused fan looking for some kind of logic in this.

You are just grasping at straws.

The puck cannot be kicked in. Whether it hits the post, an abandonded stick stick, or the goaltender before going in is irrelevant.

These are the only exceptions for a kicked puck:

(ii) A kicked puck that deflects off the stick of any player (excluding the goalkeeper’s stick) shall be ruled a good goal.

(iii) A goal will be allowed when an attacking player kicks the puck and the puck deflects off his own stick and then into the net.

[Hockeytown_Ryan 119]

You are just grasping at straws.

The puck cannot be kicked in. Whether it hits the post, an abandonded stick stick, or the goaltender before going in is irrelevant.

These are the only exceptions for a kicked puck:

Don't see how... IT counted....

so just because of a kicking motion on the puck it cannot deflect off the post and go in and count....

The rule states it cannot be kicked INTO the goal.... this case it was not! IF you think I am grasping here

fine...

but it was a kicking motion and should of been called no goal based on that alone!

They may have thought the kicking motion was not toward the net...( Now I am Grasping ). if Hossa wanted it in I guess he could of punted it in with ease...he had 1/2 the cage!

Edited April 8, 2011 by Hockeytown_Ryan

[ComradeWasabi 109]

Maybe I'm just blind, but regardless of the kick I don't ever see the puck crossing the line? In fact, in the overhead shot, it pretty clearly never does so, so even with the bogus "conclusive evidence to overturn the on-ice ruling" s***, it STILL should not have counted as a goal even if the league chooses to ignore their own kicking rules?

This goal is double bulls***.

[sputman 1,268]

Thanks for the link. Love the jab at Perry

is that a jab at perry? i took it as meaning scoring goals isn't that hard for him, especially since his 50th came with a hat trick.

regardless, corey perry is a ******.

[hillbillywingsfan 792]

You are just grasping at straws.

The puck cannot be kicked in. Whether it hits the post, an abandonded stick stick, or the goaltender before going in is irrelevant.

These are the only exceptions for a kicked puck:

Whats an abandonded stick stick?

you know i'm just playing doc. don't want to get suspended again for messing with a friend.

Thats why i thought maybe they let it slide because it hit the post first and really didn't go in...but if you follow the puck no one seems to of touched it after...so it was on a continuous movement from the kick.

Edited April 8, 2011 by hillbillywingsfan

[Majsheppard 203]

But as soon as you point these simple facts out you start getting the tin foil hat bulls***. It happens all the damned time.

esteef

Honestly, it makes you wonder how we ever got out of the caves. Every time you suggest there may be a link between something, people start saying you are crazy.

I wonder if all the people who die in hospitals only die because they go to hospitals.

Makes me glad I never go to hospitals, it will keep me alive forever.

I stand besides my observations and claims of correlation. So why don't we bring these abnormalities to light and investigate? If nothing else, it could make everything more transparent and give the NHL reason to be more careful.

To deny this and make excuses for the league only enables them to continue making the same mistakes.

That is why if Homer gets a goal called off tonight, I would, from Babs to Illich, raise hell and point out everything that is wrong no matter the fines or punishments. When there are questions, intelligent people bring as much light onto the subject as possible. Ignorant people provide excuses to keep shade on the status quo.

[hillbillywingsfan 792]

Maybe I'm just blind, but regardless of the kick I don't ever see the puck crossing the line? In fact, in the overhead shot, it pretty clearly never does so, so even with the bogus "conclusive evidence to overturn the on-ice ruling" s***, it STILL should not have counted as a goal even if the league chooses to ignore their own kicking rules?

This goal is double bulls***.

but there are some on here namely one that can clearly see that it crossed somehow.

[RusDRW 155]

Based on the current standings here are some analysis of match-ups for the Red Wings in the first round:

1. Nashville-Detroit. Nashville has a story behind of not making it out of the first round. They are a good team too. Detroit losses in any number of games. Preferably in 6.

2. LA-Detroit. Similar to Nashville. "Hard-fought" series similar to Edmonton-Detroit in 2004. Cinderella. Loss of Kopitar and Willaims and still getting out of the first round is priceless. Preferably 6 games series.

3. Phoenix-Detroit. Phoenix should win. But they are worse than both Nashville and LA (even without Kopitar). This is when you will see a lot of special things like Homers goals called off, 4 minutes major for blood, and possibly even game misconducts for Kronwall. Would be hell. We'll loose in 7 games. 7 games just for the sake of entertainment and recalling last play-offs in recaps.

4. Chicago-Detroit. Pseudo-rivalry. The only possible series where we may get call going our way if something goes wrong (read we lost 3 games in a row). We can't loose in 4. Same for Chicago. Must be 7-games series with fair officiating in Game 7.

5. Anaheim-Detroit. They won in 2007. We won in 2008. Fair series. Outcome is unknown. Both teams are good. 6-games series. Taking into account capabilities of teams we should take it.

I swear to god we will see some of these. Should we watch? I'll still do.

Edited April 8, 2011 by RusDRW

[egroen 384]

Not saying it can, But I am not saying it can't. But you interpret the rule the same as I do.

There is no stipulation saying it can't be deflected off the goal post or piece of lost equipment

laying on the ice. The puck clearly was NOT kicked INTO the goal. It was kicked tho.....

In some situations I wish the officials in all sports had to be held accountable for their actions to the fan base.

Explain how, what, and why.

The rules clearly state a goal is only allowed from a kicking motion if it then hits any players' stick other than the goalies. You can pretty much eliminate anything else - post, other player, dead octopi, etc...

I believe the NHL did issue a statement that the puck hit Hossa's stick and fully crossed the goal line. You're trying to make sense of something that does not make sense.

[wingslogo19 281]

is that a jab at perry? i took it as meaning scoring goals isn't that hard for him, especially since his 50th came with a hat trick.

regardless, corey perry is a ******.

I miss read that by a long shot. I saw tough and Perry in the same sentence

[Hockeytown_Ryan 119]

The rules clearly state a goal is only allowed from a kicking motion if it then hits any players' stick other than the goalies. You can pretty much eliminate anything else - post, other player, dead octopi, etc...

I believe the NHL did issue a statement that the puck hit Hossa's stick and fully crossed the goal line. You're trying to make sense of something that does not make sense.

Did not get the memo.

[pjgj13 30]

My point exactly. The Wings benefit from a call similar to this, and its ok. The Hawks benefit, and its CONSPIRACY THEORY time! Lame.....

Calls like this can go for you or against you. They go for you, and all is right in the world. Against you? It has to be crap reffing or a conspiracy.

He kicked the puck backwards just as much as Kronwall knocked Havlat on his ass after leaving his feet!! Clean hit, suspended, BULLs***!!

[pjgj13 30]

One way to eliminate this problem is to allow kick ins.....That way, there is NO QUESTION!!

Hey, if they can do "Fox Trax", why can't they put some kind of radio chip in the puck and the crossbar and when the puck goes over the line, the red light goes off and a goal is awarded. This would even help on pucks you can't see because it is under the goalie's equipment.

[Majsheppard 203]

I believe the NHL did issue a statement that the puck hit Hossa's stick and fully crossed the goal line. You're trying to make sense of something that does not make sense.

Oh well if they issued a statement, then it must have happened. That is the weakest argument ever.

I think I will issue a statement saying I am a billionaire, no trillionaire. That will definitely work.

[Majsheppard 203]

Well, it seems that bs win is going to make this last game against the Hawks of epic importance.

IF this Hossa no goal was called correctly, the Stars would only have needed to win to get in...

I hate the NHL, almost as much as the Wings when they play like crap.

Who am I kidding, I can never hate the Wings.

[Majsheppard 203]

Now we know for sure, if this goal wasn't allowed Dallas would have controlled their own fate, and we could have sealed their fate ourselves. Wouldn't that have been nice to have a one game playoff with a fixed ability to bounce a mortal enemy???

[Majsheppard 203]

Grrr, already Chicago is getting the calls here... (delay of game lol.)

I say screw this game. I will watch to count power plays and bad calls.

[Majsheppard 203]

Now another bad call. Or rather a no call, Franzen gets cut and another missed call.

Is it me or are the Red Wings the all time leaders in uncalled 4 minute penalties?

[pjgj13 30]

Now another bad call. Or rather a no call, Franzen gets cut and another missed call.

Is it me or are the Red Wings the all time leaders in uncalled 4 minute penalties?

Obviously you didn't hear Ed Ols*** say that Franzen was hit by his own stick because Campbell (??) wanted to play helicopter with someone else's stick.....LOL