| Author |
 Topic  |
|
|
Leafs81
PickupHockey Pro
735 Posts |
 Posted - 11/19/2009 : 12:06:55
|
Any of you saw the call the refs did last night in the Detroit and Dallas game. Just unreal, this is a disgrace to hockey, officiating, Gary Bettman, the rule of Intent to blow the whistle.
I mean the puck was in the net like 4 seconds before the whistle went. How long does it take to make a decision and blow the whistle. This is just beyond ridiculous. Take out this rule before there's any more embarassing moments.
http://ca.sports.yahoo.com/nhl/blog/puck_daddy/post/Video-Blown-call-of-season-candidate-on-Red-Win?urn=nhl,203543
And remember when it happened to Detroit last year in the conference semi finals. Well this one is ten times worst.
|
|
|
Alex116
PickupHockey Legend
6113 Posts |
Posted - 11/19/2009 : 12:22:06
|
Incredibly brutal! Thanks for the link Leafs81 as i never saw the highlights last night. That sort of thing just can't happen.
Figures they beat Detroit, prob partially due to this terrible call, with Auld in the net, right after i pick up Turco!  |
 |
|
|
Matt_Roberts85
PickupHockey Pro
Canada
936 Posts |
Posted - 11/19/2009 : 13:37:00
|
This is pretty brutal.... the amazing part for me, is the fact that the NHL office in Toronto actually called down to the ice level to tell them it was a goal, yet the ref still stuck with his original call and waived off the goal.
Is this ref so pigheaded he refused to be embarassed by the league? This one stinks pretty bad. Its either that, or Toronto called and then agreed with the refs ruling.
Well, this gives the red wings fans one more reason to beleive in the NHL vs Detroit conspiracy theories.
There is no "I" in team, but there is an "M" and an "E". |
|
|
|
Guest6189
( )
|
Posted - 11/19/2009 : 13:45:31
|
Nasty! it's not like the play was being called dead for something before the puck was in the net. If they intended to call the play dead it was because the THOUGHT it was in Auld's pads. clearly it wasn't and the goal should stand.
I think the 'intent' rule is a proper one but in this case it is misused and clearly wrong. Shameful. |
|
|
|
Alex116
PickupHockey Legend
6113 Posts |
Posted - 11/19/2009 : 14:18:28
|
It's just not possible with the explanation given. There was absolutely no reason for the ref to have "intent" to blow the play dead UNTIL it was already in the net. With the video replay, i'm in shock that this goal didn't count. 
|
|
|
| |
Topic |
|
Brad May's No Goal 
