2013 Stanley Cup Champions - Chicago Blackhawks

[Higga]

Caps cried too much about the officiating. Officials aren't the reason why we lost 5-0 in a Game 7 at home. They aren't the reason we got shut out in back to back games with a chance to win the series. They aren't the reason we scored 3 goals on Henrik Lundquist in back to back games in NY and still lost.

No team in the NHL has lost more as the higher seed than the Caps, and no team has blown more 2-0 series leads. One of my friends put it best: Caps stands for...

Choking
Ass
Pieces of
****

[Ado05]

So, people who's team is now out of the playoffs or never in, who ya cheering for now?

I'll be cheering for the Kings.

[trwi7]

Sharks

[Shemy]

In an interview with Slava Malamud of the Russian newspaper Sport-Express after the game on Monday night, Ovechkin didn't hide his displeasure with the officiating and even took it up to another level.

"I am not saying there was a phone call from (the league), but someone just wanted Game 7," he told the paper.

"For the ratings. You know, the lockout, escrow, the league needs to make profit. I don't know whether the refs were predisposed against us or the league. But to not give obvious penalties (against the Capitals), while for us any little thing was immediately penalized."

http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/story/?id=423143

leaves his feet to make a hit, then hits mcdonagh from behind and plants him into the boards leaving mcdonagh busted open, then he complains about no calls lol

the refs for the most part were letting both teams play

[Midway Bully]

Blackhawks destroyed the Red Wings tonight, Detroit just struggled to get out the defensive zone after the first period. Just couldn't counter Chicago's speed.

[Manocad]

Blackhawks destroyed the Red Wings tonight, Detroit just struggled to get out the defensive zone after the first period. Just couldn't counter Chicago's speed.

Yeah, that game proved what me, other Red Wings fans, and pretty much the entire hockey world already knew--that the Blackhawks are better than the Wings. Like, a LOT better.

[trwi7]

It's games like this that I miss TSE.

[Manocad]

He would have, after the fact of course, broken down exactly what he would have done that would have lead to a Red Wings victory over the Blackhawks en route to a Stanley cup win after a 41-5-2 regular season record.

[trwi7]

I think he argued last year that Babcock was an idiot for not pulling Howard down by 2 goals with 5 minutes left.

[EArl]

Sharks took it in over time

[trwi7]

How dirty are the Hawks? Boards, cross checks after the whistle, hooks, roughs, holds. A ton of them not called. Easy to see why they only lost 7 games in regulation this year.

[ajaX82]

How dirty are the Hawks? Boards, cross checks after the whistle, hooks, roughs, holds. A ton of them not called. Easy to see why they only lost 7 games in regulation this year.

No kidding. Scrappy game.

[WEFFPIM]

That's the most frustrated and angry I've seen this team this year. Frankly, that's the first time I've seen either team play like that, let alone against each other. To ignore that the Wings were doing the same thing would be foolish and selective. They only lost 7 games in regulation this year because of their ability to possess the puck, scoring depth on all four lines and two above-average goaltenders.

The Hjalmarsson check on Franzen was a close as you can get to a boarding call without it be certain it was a board. It was from behind, but not fully from behind (...that's what she said). Franzen turns to his left just as Hjalmarsson was about to hit him, so what started as a hit to his side developed into a hit in the back.

As for the goalie interference call.........

I thought the Hawks played well enough to win, frankly, and if they play like that again on Thursday this series is even. But the loss of fundamental hockey like winning a faceoff, looking competent on the power play and putting a guy in front of the net was alarming. Not to mention the dumbass hacking and whacking they resorted to down the stretch.

[Manocad]

Well, you're not going to get it both ways. A questionable boarding no-call allowed Chicago to score a goal, and a questionable goalie interference call took one away. Either way Detroit still had the insurance by scoring three even strength, nothing questionable goals.

[WEFFPIM]

This is gonna sound homerish, but Shaw never contacted Howard, was pushed into crease by Kindl, and didn't impede Howard's ability to make a save. So, if you're gonna say it was a make-up for the no-call on Hjalmarsson, how does that make it right still? It's not having it both ways, it's calling the game appropriately.

[Manocad]

I didn't say it was a makeup call. My point was that questionable calls are generally going to go 50/50 in your favor. If you got one in your favor you should expect that the odds are the next one isn't going to go in your favor. And regardless, the Wings still had the insurance goal.

If you want the game called as it should be, a roughing call should have been made when Cleary got blasted from behind into the net while being nowhere near the puck. But nothing got called; so be it. Not every call is going to be the best call and not every call is going to be made.

[WEFFPIM]

I didn't say it was a makeup call. My point was that questionable calls are generally going to go 50/50 in your favor. If you got one in your favor you should expect that the odds are the next one isn't going to go in your favor. And regardless, the Wings still had the insurance goal.

If you want the game called as it should be, a roughing call should have been made when Cleary got blasted from behind into the net while being nowhere near the puck. But nothing got called; so be it. Not every call is going to be the best call and not every call is going to be made.

What are you walking about? It was 2-1 when the Blackhawks goal was waved off. It should have been 2-2. It stayed 2-1, then Datsyuk scored a minute later. The insurance goal came after the goal was waved off. Are you implying that even if the goal had been called correctly as a goal, it wouldn't have mattered because the Wings scored a minute later? That's...quite an implication to make.

Yes, I want the game to be called correctly. Yes, Cleary getting schmucked should have warranted a penalty. Officials should be able to do their jobs appropriately. But to be so egregiously wrong on a game-changing, and potentially series-changing, call like that is inexcusable to brush off as simply "eh, it happens."

It's also amazing to me that a goalie interference call isn't reviewable.

[trwi7]

Hjalmarsson boarded Franzen which went uncalled (and it should've been a penalty). 7 seconds later Chicago scored their first goal. If the board is called, which it should've been, Chicago doesn't score, it's still 2-0 and Detroit is on the power play.

[Manocad]

What are you walking about? It was 2-1 when the Blackhawks goal was waved off. It should have been 2-2. It stayed 2-1, then Datsyuk scored a minute later. The insurance goal came after the goal was waved off. Are you implying that even if the goal had been called correctly as a goal, it wouldn't have mattered because the Wings scored a minute later? That's...quite an implication to make.

So what you're saying is that it's unrealistic to assume that Datsyuk still wouldn't have scored had the goal not been waved off and the score wound up 2-2. That's sure as hell less unrealistic than saying that he WOULDN'T have scored had the goal not been waved off. To imply that Datsyuk wouldn't have scored the third goal solely because a goal didn't get waved off and the game wound up tied 2-2 has no basis in logic whatsoever. The two events aren't mutually inclusive. In fact, they have nothing to do with each other. But I'm not trying to rewrite history as Datsyuk did in fact score a third goal. Your assertion does try to rewrite history by claiming that due to it being a "totally different game" he wouldn't have. Not to mention that you're also alluding to it being a "series changer" meaning you're assuming that the 2-2 tie would have resulted in a Hawks win. So you're actually making not one but two leaps of faith.

What I'm saying by "insurance goal" is that even if the goal wasn't waved off, the final score winds up being 3-2. If you want to claim that the goal not being waved off would have made it a completely different game that the Blackhawks would have won because Datsyuk wouldn't have scored, Toews would have wound up getting a hat trick in 3:15 of the third period, and all the bars in Chicago would have served free beer to all ticket stub holders, go right ahead. But complaining about not getting awarded a second goal when the other team scored three just comes off like whining.

I still think the Blackhawks are a better team than the Wings, and I don't put Detroit in the driver's seat in this series in any way unless they win Game 4. They've played above expectations and gotten some luck, but that's always part of hockey. The Wings won two games fair and square, i.e. with the same sort of luck and effort with which hockey games are frequently won.

[Manocad]

Hjalmarsson boarded Franzen which went uncalled (and it should've been a penalty). 7 seconds later Chicago scored their first goal. If the board is called, which it should've been, Chicago doesn't score, it's still 2-0 and Detroit is on the power play.

Seems to me it's a lot more logical to assume that a goal wouldn't have been scored due to there not being a 5-on-4 situation than to assume that a tie game condition would have eliminated a goal scored 5-on-5 a little less than two minutes later after a goal was waved off.

And the explanation I heard about why it was goalie interference was that Shaw's proximity to Howard was such that Howard couldn't use his stick to play the puck. That violated the "impairs the goalkeeper’s ability to move freely within his crease or defend his goal" part of the goalie interference rule.