WSS11
Registered User
- Oct 7, 2009
- 6,186
- 5,441
Because we've seen the conclusive proof that it was a good goal. It just wasn't called correctly.
Obviously it wasn’t
Because we've seen the conclusive proof that it was a good goal. It just wasn't called correctly.
There’s been more instances of them not doing that
That doesn't negate anything I said. It being on its side, there is no white between the top tip of the puck and the goal line which is why it was inconclusive. That's why they didn't rob them of anything because that's not a goal by NHL standards. They had plenty of time to review that and make that call.
Probably the same geeks that called this “no goal” and cost the Bruins a playoff birth.Clear goal
There’s been more instances of them not doing that
How can you possibly say this if you think the linesmen putting the nets back into play "NEVER" happens? You're obviously going off your own anecdotal experience, but you're stating it like fact.
I can do that too! I've seen the linesmen fix the net dozens of times but I've never seen the situation that happened this game. Therefore, there is more instances of the former than the latter.
(You'd think moderators would be held to a higher posting standard...)
Maybe be stronger on your skates? Bruins player had the puck and reversed hit the Sharks player. SJ player knocked off the net, no matter how you shake it down
Keep changing your answer, because it's still wrong.
High stick goal
Missing the net being off
Yeah..Okay
There clearly is white, lol.
Prove me wrong then.
Again, they had plenty of time while play was going on to review that and you can't tell from that angle. It's inconclusive and the right call was made for the situation. Only people lying to themselves believe what you believe.
If I were to point to the Bruins getting the short end of it, it would be with the no goal callMaybe you’ve missed the multiple times I said the Sharks also got screwed. Or are you just choosing to think it’s a conspiracy against San Jose?
This thread is hilarious
“Right call” seems awfully subjective here.
Maybe it was also the “right call” on Wagner’s goal then, you know, since it benefited my team.
Again, they had plenty of time while play was going on to review that and you can't tell from that angle. It's inconclusive and the right call was made for the situation. Only people lying to themselves believe what you believe.
LOL you can clearly tell from that screenshot that it's a goal. Keep lying to yourself that it wasn't. It's all moot anyway; hockey justice was served.