Toggle sidebar

#49 KINGS lose to WINGS 2-3 in Shoot Out, and we don't even get a Moral Victory ?

  • Xenforo Cloud will be upgrading us to version 2.3.5 on March 3rd at 12 AM GMT. This version has increased stability and fixes several bugs. We expect downtime for the duration of the update. The admin team will continue to work on existing issues, templates and upgrade all necessary available addons to minimize impact of this new version. Click Here for Updates
likid said:
I read many posts on HF bords where they are laughing at soccer or everything connected to them, but there you will at least see, that some players will acknowledge to referee that they scored irregular goal when it is so obviously but referee somehow missed it.

In NHL I don't know if I ever saw that. And that is why I was really bothered with Wings celebration at the end. I personally could never celebrate a win like that if I would win with such a obvious mistake that everybody but referees were aware of....
Click to expand...

Hear Hear!
 
Just salt in the wound, really. I like that the Kings played pissed off after that and as usual they just couldn't buy a break. The usual Detroit picks were working, and there was ample opportunity for a make-up call in OT, but it is what it is and I'm going to pretend that maybe it'll be a blessing and piss them off good for the next game!
 
Jason Lewis said:
Salt in the wound.

The play should have been and could have been reviewed based on the wording of the law.

http://www.hockeybuzz.com/blog.php?post_id=57314

38.4 Situations Subject to Video Review - The following situations are subject to review by the Video Goal Judge:

(i) Puck crossing the goal line.

(ii) Puck in the net prior to the goal frame being dislodged.

(iii) Puck in the net prior to, or after expiration of time at the end of the period.

(iv) Puck directed or batted into the net by a hand or foot. With the use of a foot/skate, was a distinct kicking motion evident? If so, the apparent goal must be disallowed. A DISTINCT KICKING MOTION is one which, with a pendulum motion, the player propels the puck with his skate into the net. If the Video Goal Judge determines that it was put into the net by an attacking player using a distinct kicking motion, it must be ruled NO GOAL. This would also be true even if the puck, after being kicked, deflects off any other player of either team and then into the net. This is still NO GOAL. See also 49.2.

(v) Puck deflected directly into the net off an Official.

(vi) Puck struck with a high-stick, above the height of the crossbar, by an attacking player prior to entering the goal. The determining factor is where the puck makes contact with the stick. If the puck makes contact with the stick below the level of the crossbar and enters the goal, this goal shall be allowed.

(vii) To establish the correct time on the official game clock, provided the game time is visible on the Video Goal Judge’s monitors.

(viii) The video review process shall be permitted to assist the referees in determining the legitimacy of all potential goals (e.g. to ensure they are “good hockey goalsâ€). For example (but not limited to), pucks that enter the net by going through the net meshing, pucks that enter the net from underneath the net frame, pucks that enter the net undetected by the referee, etc.
Click to expand...

The leagues statement:
The NHL said in a statement although "video of the play appears to show the puck hitting the protective mesh above the glass before deflecting off goaltender Jonathan Quick and into the Los Angeles net. While the Situation Room examined the video, this is not a reviewable play; therefore the referee's call on the ice stands."
Click to expand...
 
Brad Doty said:
Just salt in the wound, really. I like that the Kings played pissed off after that and as usual they just couldn't buy a break. The usual Detroit picks were working, and there was ample opportunity for a make-up call in OT, but it is what it is and I'm going to pretend that maybe it'll be a blessing and piss them off good for the next game!
Click to expand...

I would've love Richards to score on Howard in OT, then tell him to "Suck it!"
 
Brad Doty said:
Just salt in the wound, really. I like that the Kings played pissed off after that and as usual they just couldn't buy a break. The usual Detroit picks were working, and there was ample opportunity for a make-up call in OT, but it is what it is and I'm going to pretend that maybe it'll be a blessing and piss them off good for the next game!
Click to expand...

If I remember right, their tear of the league (that ended with SC) in 2012 started with that loss in Detroit, when they received two goals in last few minutes of the game after they were much better team and held Wings to really low numbers of shots (under 10 till last 10 min).

Maybe tonights effect will be similar...
 
Well we know the only play from the NHL that will make the ESPN show tonight.
 
I like how NHLHD tonight is saying it was a "controversial" goal...?? it wasn't controversial, it was a TERRIBLE, terrible, BAD call.

A stupid excuse for even having 2 refs on the ice. Having the 2nd ref in a booth reviewing all goals (and penalties) makes much more sense than having him on skates - he's totally worthless.

There's really no controversy about this goal... :laugh:
 
kingsfan28 said:
It's the typical blanket statement relieving the refs of any wrong doing. They didn't see it, so it didn't happen.
Click to expand...

That's the biggest injustice. That they'll allow something like this to happen again. What if this happens in a playoff game? Stuff like this is why they have video review to begin with. The most important thing is getting the call right. When you don't acknowledge when this stuff happens, it makes you and your league look dumb.

Imagine in an NFL game if the receiver scored a winning touchdown after stepping out of bounds on the run and they just said 'Well, it's not reviewable because it's not in the book'. Get the damn call right, that's what's important. If there is some stupid rule getting in the way of your refs making the correct call, then fix it. I don't understand why it's so hard.
 
kingsfan28 said:
It's the typical blanket statement relieving the refs of any wrong doing. They didn't see it, so it didn't happen.
Click to expand...

Especially when the rulebook gives them such a CLEARCUT fall back of reviewing EVERYTHING to cover their ass.

How they don't review things all the time given what the book says...I just don't know. Better safe than sorry. The rule seems well intended but what good is it if the "Interpretation" of it and the historic call is it is not reviewable?

Puzzling.
 
jml87 said:
That's the biggest injustice. That they'll allow something like this to happen again. What if this happens in a playoff game? Stuff like this is why they have video review to begin with. The most important thing is getting the call right. When you don't acknowledge when this stuff happens, it makes you and your league look dumb.

Imagine in an NFL game if the receiver scored a winning touchdown after stepping out of bounds on the run and they just said 'Well, it's not reviewable because it's not in the book'. Get the damn call right, that's what's important. If there is some stupid rule getting in the way of your refs making the correct call, then fix it. I don't understand why it's so hard.
Click to expand...

I'm soooo glad i'm not at that game, I hope Herby doesn't cause trouble. I'd be so out of my mind i'd have to get the hell out of there fast to not cause trouble.

As a note, that hang time was about 3 seconds.

Being the ******* I feel like being to the NHL right now i'd toss in a few pucks over the glass at one of the other arenas (during a time out or something) with "Non-review-able" on them.
 
likid said:
I read many posts on HF bords where they are laughing at soccer or everything connected to them, but there you will at least see, that some players will acknowledge to referee that they scored irregular goal when it is so obviously but referee somehow missed it.

In NHL I don't know if I ever saw that. And that is why I was really bothered with Wings celebration at the end. I personally could never celebrate a win like that if I would win with such a obvious mistake that everybody but referees were aware of....
Click to expand...

It bothered me as well. I couldn't understand why their jumping around. Seemed a bit of a overreaction of happiness.
 
Butch 19 said:
I like how NHLHD tonight is saying it was a "controversial" goal...?? it wasn't controversial, it was a TERRIBLE, terrible, BAD call.

A stupid excuse for even having 2 refs on the ice. Having the 2nd ref in a booth reviewing all goals (and penalties) makes much more sense than having him on skates - he's totally worthless.

There's really no controversy about this goal... :laugh:
Click to expand...

It's so controversial the NHL network is not even showing any highlights other than the shootout.Skipped right over they entire game as if it didn't happen. Every other completed game has the full highlight package. :shakehead
 
kingsfan28 said:
It's so controversial the NHL network is not even showing any highlights other than the shootout.Skipped right over they entire game as if it didn't happen. Every other completed game has the full highlight package. :shakehead
Click to expand...

See, that's garbage. Just chicken**** from the NHL.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Top Bottom