Game 7: Pittsburgh at Detroit 6/12/09

[caps87]

Originally Posted by westgennylax3

i just want you to admit you know it was a blown call whether u hate the red wings or not then ill shut up

just shut up

[westgennylax3]

nope i want a few people to suck it up and admit it was a blown call even though you hate the team

[Philly Fan 27]

hey, who handed godard the cup? i saw him w/ it but didnt see who handed it to him

[caps87]

nope i want a few people to suck it up and admit it was a blown call even though you hate the team

well youre wasting your time. nobody will admit it simply because you want them to.

[Killah_punk]

Originally Posted by Philly Fan 27

hey, who handed godard the cup? i saw him w/ it but didnt see who handed it to him

Staal.

[westgennylax3]

what you just said is that people know it was a blown ****ty call possibly costing them the game but no one wants to admit it

[Mr-Mustard]

Originally Posted by westgennylax3

what you just said is that people know it was a blown ****ty call possibly costing them the game but no one wants to admit it

Now you've gone form "definitely" to "possibly".

What fuging icing call are you whining about?
The first Talbot goal was off a bad turnover (Stuart electing to pass through the zone instead of up the boards, puck goes off a skate and Talbot converts) and the second goal was a result of a bad pinch by Stuart allowing a 2 on 1, Talbot beating Osgoode over his glove.

Detoilet lost.
Blame Stuart and Osgoode not the refs.

Post some video evidence or just shut it.

[westgennylax3]

if i had the video i would...i said "possibly" because that would have been 1-1 and who knows about overtime...orpik just dumps the puck a good 3-4 feet before the center line and shoulda been icing the booth replayed it and evreything

[The Crow]

you cannot change the past!

[Mike Tython]

Originally Posted by westgennylax3

if i had the video i would...i said "possibly" because that would have been 1-1 and who knows about overtime...orpik just dumps the puck a good 3-4 feet before the center line and shoulda been icing the booth replayed it and evreything

If they called the icing, it wouldn't have been 1-1. It would have been 0-0, and for all you know, the Pens could have won the game 14-0 after that. Shut up already.

[westgennylax3]

possibly you never know but then they wouldnt have had that first goal could have been completely different

[Isles4life]

I'm not sure why I put the time and effort into this, but around 2:50 of this clip is the alleged blown icing call and the ensuing goal by Talbot.

YouTube - Penguins @ Red Wings Game 7 6/12/09

Now, here's part of what the NHL rulebook says about icing:

For the purpose of this Rule, the center red line will divide the ice into halves. Should any player of a Team, equal or superior in numerical strength to the opposing Team, shoot, bat or deflect the puck from his own half of the ice beyond the goal line of the opposing Team, play shall be stopped and the puck faced-off at the end face-off spot of the offending Team, unless on the play, the puck shall have entered the net of the opposing Team, in which case the goal shall be allowed.

For the purpose of this Rule, the point of last contact with the puck by the Team in possession shall be used to determine whether icing has occurred or not. As such, the Team in possession must "gain the line" in order for the icing to be nullified. "Gaining the line" shall mean that the puck (not the player's skate) must make contact with the center red line in order to nullify a potential icing.

As long as I've watched the game, the bolded statement has been interpreted as the player's follow through on the dump in. Watching the video clip, it sure looks like Orpik's follow through could very well have gained the line, nullifying an icing call. And even with my generally poor opinion of NHL officiating, I trust the judgment of the linesmen on the ice who had a much better angle of the play. Claiming that should have been icing by a few feet is flat out wrong. Arguing that it's a matter of an inch or so would make more sense, but I'd still disagree.

Usually the media, led by TSN, makes a pretty big deal about these type of questionable calls on this big of a stage, but I didn't hear a single word about it except from a poster on here. In other words, no one else thought it should be icing.

[stremb]

Originally Posted by westgennylax3

if i had the video i would...i said "possibly" because that would have been 1-1 and who knows about overtime...orpik just dumps the puck a good 3-4 feet before the center line and shoulda been icing the booth replayed it and evreything

fuk yeh bro!!!! dude if you seriously had that vid and sent it to the NHL then they would be glad to change the call for you!!! then maybe they could have a game 8 and the red wings could win!!!!!























you are fuking retarded

[Sam1410]

Originally Posted by westgennylax3

possibly you never know but then they wouldnt have had that first goal could have been completely different

Wait. You are blaming the loss on a goal in the second minute of the second period?

If this was OT, then MAYBE you would have a point (but not really because Stuart should never have made that pass - the icing was waived off and he knew it), but not in the second fuking period. The Wings had almost 40 minutes to get that goal back.

This isn't grade school pal - you don't merely subtract a goal and say "see the game was 1-1" - teams play differently based on the score and a million different scenarios would change. Maybe the Pens pour it on in the third if they were only up by one instead of sitting back and limiting the Wings to 7 shots trying to protect a 2 goal lead.

Way to simplistic to merely say the game ends in a tie. Like grade school simple. Maybe even pre-school simple.

Oh yeah also, THE FUKING GAME IS OVER GET OVER IT!!!!!

[T800m101]

Originally Posted by The Crow

you cannot change the past!

I'm having trouble reading what that says, could you make it any bigger?