| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| Mario 66 |
Posted - 12/09/2010 : 12:38:04
I did not want to put too much of my own input on this topic as I am sure people are viewing this with different perspectives. Regardless, I am sure all the canucks & blackhawks fan are satisfied about last nights victories but there is clearly an issue with the officiating.
I get the theory on cutting officials slack as hockey is a fast paced game but two blatant horrible misses in which all 8 officials (both games) had the right to either blow the play dead or add their input to ensure the right call was made. Nothing was done and two teams who will be surely fighting for final playoff spots ( Stars & Ducks) could potentially be screwed for the point or two that they missed out on. |
| 9 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| nuxfan |
Posted - 12/14/2010 : 11:58:01
no, I don't worry about blown calls from 17 years ago. |
| Yewcandoit |
Posted - 12/14/2010 : 11:40:12
There were way too many times the Canucks could have changed their 94 fate. How about that crossbar?
But ya, the league could use another Pavel Bure  |
| The Duke |
Posted - 12/11/2010 : 07:36:52
Thought you Vancouver fans may have interested in Lindens blown call which may have given you guys a stanley cup 
Guess not |
| nuxfan |
Posted - 12/10/2010 : 10:41:42
soooo... any other thoughts on blown calls the other night, or at least in this current decade? |
| The Duke |
Posted - 12/09/2010 : 19:53:06
Brett Hulls skate clearly in the blue ice ( really strict on that rule at that time ) on the Dallas stanley cup winning goal againist Buffalo...with no review...now theres a blown call !!
Remember the one in 1994 during the stanley cup final ? same blue ice crap. T.Linden`s goal was waived off, i think the black paint on the toe of his skate was in the blue ice , what a crazy blown call, one of the worst calls i`ve seen. May very well have cost Vancouver the stanley cup.
Boy was that Pavel Bure something. Don`t hear his name tossed around much in common hockey greats - conversations. He was one of the best to ever lace them up in my opinion. |
| nuxfan |
Posted - 12/09/2010 : 16:40:50
As for the Canucks game, the assumption made at the time was that the decision to blow the play down is discretionary for the ref, and they do not *have* to do so unless there is a definite injury on the play that takes the goalie out of play or the mask comes off. In this case there was an injury, but the goal was scored so quickly after the hit to the mask that the ref could not have known that the goalie was injured for real, hence no stoppage. And once the goal is in and called, they can't go back.
As a Canucks fan I was happy with the ruling, but I can see how I'd be pissed if it had gone the other way. A lucky bounce for us in an otherwise unlucky game. |
| Alex116 |
Posted - 12/09/2010 : 16:10:47
quote:
Originally posted by Mario 66
Hey Sorry Alex first time posting a form and i thought just referencing the games would identify the calls i was talking about but ya you are correct with both situations.
S'all good. Just so you know for future, even a short mention of the incident or a little more specific would prob get a quicker response. Prob more responses too. Welcome to the forum!  |
| Mario 66 |
Posted - 12/09/2010 : 15:01:37
Hey Sorry Alex first time posting a form and i thought just referencing the games would identify the calls i was talking about but ya you are correct with both situations.
|
| Alex116 |
Posted - 12/09/2010 : 14:21:29
We're left to guess what you're referring to? As far as the Canucks game, i'm assuming you mean the Ducks goalie (McElhinney) getting nailed straight on in the face (mask) and falling to the ice while Daniel Sedin popped in the goal to pull the Canucks to within 1? I wondered about this as well and watched sportscenter when i go home to see what was said, if anything, about it. "The Panel", discussed it and i believe it was Doug Maclean who said, "no call was the right call". Apparently, from what he said, the NHL doesn't have a rule like they do in Europe and elsewhere which forces the ref to blow the whistle immediatley following such a play. His view was it's too difficult to put the onus on a ref to determine, in a split second, how badly a goalie might be injured.
May not be the best way to score as it isn't ever nice to see a guy go down like that, but from what i heard, it certainly wasn't against the rules or a blown call of any sort?
Not sure if this is what you were referring to even but i assume so?
The incident in the Chicago game i have to assume is the "alledged" thrown stick by Brent Seabrook which if ruled that way, would have resulted in a penalty shot? I can def see Marc Crawfords view on this and understand his outrage. I can only guess that the official didn't think it was intentional? However, IMO, like a high stick, intentional or not, it should be called?
Are these the two incidents you were referring to? |
