51 replies to this topic

[GMRwings1983]

Dead horse I know, but if Malkin had been suspended for Game 3 like he was supposed to be (until Uncle Gary recinded the instigator penalty citing that "the game needs its stars to play") then Malkin wouldn't had been able to factor in to ALL the goals (except the EN)

 

If Detroit goes up 3 games to ZERO in that series, Detroit wins back-back Cups...Again! But Uncle Gary couldn't have that happen now could he?

 

Malkin wrestled with Zetterberg at the end of game 5, from what I remember.  Not game 2.

[LeftWinger]

Malkin wrestled with Zetterberg at the end of game 5, from what I remember.  Not game 2.

 

 

 

Game 2...and Malkin was doing more than wrestling....

 

 

 

Nah...that was not instagating a fight with Hank...f*** you Bettman!

Edited by LeftWinger, 30 December 2012 - 05:46 AM.

[RedWingsDad]

I started watching the Wings back in 95. Never even watched hockey before that. That sweep was sickening because I was a new fan. So maybe it holds a bit more importance to me than the 2009 finals did. In 2009 the Pens really did deserve to win that series. They held the Wings to one goal in each of the final two games. The 1995 team was better IMHO and the 1995 series hurt the worst to me.

In the end, the better team won both series thats for sure. NJ really did dominate the Wings in 95, but the Pens found a way to get it done in 2009. Gotta give them credit for that. It wasn't like the Wings just rolled over and died in either of those series. They had injuries or were just beat by a better team.

Too many men on the ice. No carry over penalty on Malkin. Pen's had help.
 
Edit: LeftWinger beat me to the Malkin comment.I'll post the other:

 

Edit 2: Can't figure out how to embed youtube videos.

Edited by RedWingsDad, 30 December 2012 - 09:51 AM.

[Nightfall]

Too many men on the ice. No carry over penalty on Malkin. Pen's had help.
 
Edit: LeftWinger beat me to the Malkin comment.I'll post the other:

 

Edit 2: Can't figure out how to embed youtube videos.

So referee error on a power play they never scored on?

 

Sorry, but I guess I have to agree to disagree.  The Pens were not handed the cup by anyone but the Wings themselves.  The Wings had that series in the bag at 3-2 and they couldn't score more than 1 goal each of the last two games.  The Pens deserved the cup in 2009 and the won it fair and square.  IMHO, the ultimate copout in sports is to say that your team had won a championship, but was robbed by the refs, league, bad luck, etc.  That doesn't happen in a 7 game series in the NHL.  The better team always wins.

Edited by Nightfall, 30 December 2012 - 10:44 AM.

[haroldsnepsts]

So referee error on a power play they never scored on?

 

Sorry, but I guess I have to agree to disagree.  The Pens were not handed the cup by anyone but the Wings themselves.  The Wings had that series in the bag at 3-2 and they couldn't score more than 1 goal each of the last two games.  The Pens deserved the cup in 2009 and the won it fair and square.  IMHO, the ultimate copout in sports is to say that your team had won a championship, but was robbed by the refs, league, bad luck, etc.  That doesn't happen in a 7 game series in the NHL.  The better team always wins.

Agreed. 

 

Though I've been through this argument before and not everyone sees it that way.  When the Wings win I never hear it the other way from people here, that they got help on a few calls, that they were fortunate because the other team was so injured. 

 

Like how this should've been a penalty shot in game 1:

 

 

over the course of a 7 game series most of the calls even out, and the injuries are just part of the game. 

 

@RedWingsDad you should be able to just paste the link and it will embed the link automatically.

[Nev]

FWIW, I thought the 2008 finals were horrifically reffed in favour of the Pens, and we won that one, so that can't be put down to sour grapes.  Pens fans liked to point out how the total PIMs were even that series, ignoring how they racked them up when they started gooning the joint out after being blown away in games 1 + 2.  Not to mention Gary Roberts cowardly sucker punch on Franzen, trying to start a fight with Datsyuk, the blatant trip on Dats with 10 seconds to go which led directly to that last second chance, Hal Gill committing Interference and/or Holding on every single shift, the way Detroit defencemen found themselves repeatedly without sticks when the Pens were on the PP.....I could go on, but suffice it to say the interview by Ozzie/McCarty after they won was quite telling.

 

As for the too many men in '09, what really got me was that once the refs realised, they didn't blow the whistle, they told the 6th man to get off the ice.  No wonder Ilitch didn't want to shake Bettmans hand after game 7.

[Johnz96]

 

 

 

FWIW, I thought the 2008 finals were horrifically reffed in favour of the Pens, and we won that one, so that can't be put down to sour grapes.  Pens fans liked to point out how the total PIMs were even that series, ignoring how they racked them up when they started gooning the joint out after being blown away in games 1 + 2.  Not to mention Gary Roberts cowardly sucker punch on Franzen, trying to start a fight with Datsyuk, the blatant trip on Dats with 10 seconds to go which led directly to that last second chance, Hal Gill committing Interference and/or Holding on every single shift, the way Detroit defencemen found themselves repeatedly without sticks when the Pens were on the PP.....I could go on, but suffice it to say the interview by Ozzie/McCarty after they won was quite telling.

 

As for the too many men in '09, what really got me was that once the refs realised, they didn't blow the whistle, they told the 6th man to get off the ice.  No wonder Ilitch didn't want to shake Bettmans hand after game 7.

 

 

Up until the SCF in 09 obstruction was called throughout the playoffs. The refs were instructed to put away the whistles for the finals and the Prens took advantage of it (especially Gill)
Especially with Hossa on the team the Wings were stocked and considered runaway favorites to win the Cup when they signed Hossa. As Bettman is well aware, restricting talent and skill gives weaker teams a better chance of winning.
Regardless, we probably would have won if Babcock didn't rely so much on an injured and obviously ineffective Hossa.

Edited by Johnz96, 30 December 2012 - 01:25 PM.

[Crymson]

So referee error on a power play they never scored on?

 

Sorry, but I guess I have to agree to disagree.  The Pens were not handed the cup by anyone but the Wings themselves.  The Wings had that series in the bag at 3-2 and they couldn't score more than 1 goal each of the last two games.  The Pens deserved the cup in 2009 and the won it fair and square.  IMHO, the ultimate copout in sports is to say that your team had won a championship, but was robbed by the refs, league, bad luck, etc.  That doesn't happen in a 7 game series in the NHL.  The better team always wins.

 

The Penguins were not on a power play when they had too many men on the ice. It was at a vital juncture early in game 3.

 

And lol @ the "the better team always wins" argument. OK, fine, take L.A.'s Cup-winning team and remove Quick, Brown, Doughty, Richards and Carter to freak injuries. Were the Devils to win under those circumstances, would they have been the better team? Your argument makes literally no sense. It has no anchor in reality.

[haroldsnepsts]

The Penguins were not on a power play when they had too many men on the ice. It was at a vital juncture early in game 3.

 

And lol @ the "the better team always wins" argument. OK, fine, take L.A.'s Cup-winning team and remove Quick, Brown, Doughty, Richards and Carter to freak injuries. Were the Devils to win under those circumstances, would they have been the better team? Your argument makes literally no sense. It has no anchor in reality.

lol @ you thinking his argument has no anchor in reality when it is based on playing the actual games.  Yours on the other hand has little anchor in reality as it is the one based primarily on your own opinion of who is better.  So since his actually happened, it literally makes a lot of sense.

 

In your fictional example, yes the Devils were the better team.  Because they won. On the ice.  In reality.  Where the game is actually played.  As to why they won, of course injuries play a factor.  Just like they do when the Wings win.   It seems like the Kings would've been better if they were healthy, but who knows?  We'll never know because that's not what happened.  What we do know was the Devils won. 

 

The Stanley Cup isn't won by who has the best team on paper or on your theories as to who is better.  It's won on the ice.

[The Axe]

<blockquote class='ipsBlockquote'data-author="LeftWinger" data-cid="2337044" data-time="1356822168"><p>
Dead horse I know, but if Malkin had been suspended for Game 3 like he was supposed to be (until Uncle Gary recinded the instigator penalty citing that "the game needs its stars to play") then Malkin wouldn't had been able to factor in to ALL the goals (except the EN)<br />
 <br />
If Detroit goes up 3 games to ZERO in that series, Detroit wins back-back Cups...Again! But Uncle Gary couldn't have that happen now could he?</p></blockquote>


Parity is his goal. Not fairness.

[Nev]

Did you know in 2009 Gill had just 3 minors in 24 games?  The following season, playing for Montreal against Pittsburgh, he had 7 in 7 games - all for obstruction, interference or holding.  Its hard not to be paranoid when that kind of stuff happens.

Up until the SCF in 09 obstruction was called throughout the playoffs. The refs were instructed to put away the whistles for the finals and the Prens took advantage of it (especially Gill)

[Nightfall]

The Stanley Cup isn't won by who has the best team on paper or on your theories as to who is better.  It's won on the ice.

This right here.  I couldn't agree more.