HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Western Conference > Central Division > Dallas Stars
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

Why does everyone hate the Stars so????

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
12-26-2005, 04:28 AM
  #51
Speedyturtle
Registered User
 
Speedyturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Edmonton
Country: Canada
Posts: 658
vCash: 500
My hatred for the Stars is because I'm an Oiler fan. But I have a lot of respect for the team and its fans. They've been a consistently good team and I'm surprised they haven't won more cups than they have. If the Stars ever played the Flames or Canucks I'd probably cheer for the Stars.

Speedyturtle is offline  
Old
12-26-2005, 06:32 PM
  #52
Kritter471
Registered User
 
Kritter471's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Dallas
Country: United States
Posts: 7,719
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Kritter471
Quote:
Originally Posted by toth939
The goal clearly shouldn't have counted. Hull's skate was in the crease when the puck entered the net. That type of goal had been disallowed numerous times throughout the playoffs. All that crap about "possession" had NEVER been used to justify a goal when the player was in the crease that season.
That's because the memo that clarified the rule happened in March of 1999. Look, it was a bad and confusing rule. I don't think any fans (Stars or otherwise) will debate that. But per the letter of the law, the goal was legal. Hull shot the puck then his foot entered the crease. The puck rebounded off of Hasek's pad. Hull, foot still in the crease, shot and scored. But a change of possession never took place, and the rule that you could be in the crease if you were in possession of the puck before you got there was legitimate. Maybe it hadn't been called that way. But it was in the rulebook, and that's all that matters.

Quote:
The reason so many Sabres fans are upset about it, (besides the fact that it happened in game 6 of the Stanley Cup Finals), is that the goal was never reviewed in the first place. And on top of that, the league lied about it.

Bryan Lewis, the NHL's director of officiating, said as soon as the goal was scored, off-ice officials immediately went to the video replay for a review.

"Every such goal has been reviewed by the NHL since the start of the season, including this one," Lewis said.

But only 13 seconds elapsed from the time the puck crossed the goal line to when all the media ran onto the ice, thus ending the review period. There is no way that they gave the goal an honest review in 13 seconds. Games were usually delayed minutes for that type of review.
I won't argue this. There's no way they reviewed it until later (though media running onto the ice doesn't end the review period - the officials leaving the ice would). And that was their mistake. But not the Stars.

Quote:
The NHL should have just apologized after screwing up and said that it shouldn't have been a goal and that mistakes happen. But instead they tried to insist that it was a good goal by referring to obscure rules and memos.
/ Well it was a good goal. No matter how obscure the rules and memos may have been, they were still the letter of the law. They should have apologized for screwing up the review process and admitted the scenario was a worst-case (in terms of a Cup deciding goal being subject to review), but the goal is still good.

Quote:
Every Stars fan knows deep-down that the goal should have been disallowed. Otherwise they are just kidding themselves. I didn't blame the Dallas' players then, and I have no hate for the Stars now. But that was the worst day in the history of the National Hockey League, and it won't be forgotten, especially in Buffalo.
Uh... no I don't. I think fans who insist the goal isn't good are fooling themselves, as understandable as that denial may be. You said it yourself - they referenced rules and memos to defend the call. They didn't make it up on the spot, or call it "the intention of the rule." The goal was (and is) good.

Still was a great game. Though Buffalo, for controling parts of overtime, was dumb for letting Hull stand so wide open in front of the net. If you're mad at anyone, be mad at the defenseman that goes screaming by about three seconds before the goal was scored. Hull was his man.

Kritter471 is offline  
Old
12-26-2005, 07:38 PM
  #53
txomisc
Registered User
 
txomisc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: California
Country: United States
Posts: 8,540
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by toth939
Where did you get this from? Ruff never agreed that "it was the right call." Immediately following the game Ruff asked Bettman for an explanation and Bettman just walked away.

The goal clearly shouldn't have counted. Hull's skate was in the crease when the puck entered the net. That type of goal had been disallowed numerous times throughout the playoffs. All that crap about "possession" had NEVER been used to justify a goal when the player was in the crease that season. The reason so many Sabres fans are upset about it, (besides the fact that it happened in game 6 of the Stanley Cup Finals), is that the goal was never reviewed in the first place. And on top of that, the league lied about it.

Bryan Lewis, the NHL's director of officiating, said as soon as the goal was scored, off-ice officials immediately went to the video replay for a review.

"Every such goal has been reviewed by the NHL since the start of the season, including this one," Lewis said.

But only 13 seconds elapsed from the time the puck crossed the goal line to when all the media ran onto the ice, thus ending the review period. There is no way that they gave the goal an honest review in 13 seconds. Games were usually delayed minutes for that type of review.

The NHL should have just apologized after screwing up and said that it shouldn't have been a goal and that mistakes happen. But instead they tried to insist that it was a good goal by referring to obscure rules and memos.

Every Stars fan knows deep-down that the goal should have been disallowed. Otherwise they are just kidding themselves. I didn't blame the Dallas' players then, and I have no hate for the Stars now. But that was the worst day in the history of the National Hockey League, and it won't be forgotten, especially in Buffalo.
Heaven forbid they refer to rules and memos about rules to point out the goal was legit.

txomisc is offline  
Old
12-28-2005, 02:30 PM
  #54
hockeyfan05
Registered User
 
hockeyfan05's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Detroit, MI
Country: United States
Posts: 361
vCash: 500
People hate Dallas for the same reason people hate Detroit, New Jersey and Colorado.

hockeyfan05 is offline  
Old
12-29-2005, 11:38 AM
  #55
streakie
Registered User
 
streakie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Dallas
Country: United States
Posts: 872
vCash: 500
Send a message via Yahoo to streakie
Cause were pretty??? No I am sure it has to do with winning, I am sure it has to with buying high priced free agents in the past, and I am sure it is because of that lovely goal. As a Stars fan I agree with what you have to say Kritter, but I also wish they had said it was a no goal so that we could have won it out right without people being upset about how it was won. The Stars would have won anyways even if they had disallowed that goal. One day it will be really nice to win it without anyone questioning the win!

streakie is offline  
Old
12-29-2005, 01:14 PM
  #56
Murphy
Registered User
 
Murphy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Edmonton
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,104
vCash: 500
I hate them because I'm an Oiler fan, but it's a hate that comes with alot of respect. Those series are among the best hockey I've ever witnessed. Lots of hitting, intensity and drama. Playoff hockey at it's best.

Murphy is offline  
Old
12-29-2005, 02:49 PM
  #57
Hasbro
HFBoards Sponsor
 
Hasbro's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: South Rectangle
Country: Sami
Posts: 30,309
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stars99Lobo37
Because they don't like hockey in Texas?
Just not liking Texas period is a source of animus from the Colorado fanbase, it's not so much pronounced as it was during the 70's and 80's, but Colorado has a disdain for states that provided a huge influx of population and big suppliers of tourists or CU out of state students. Cali has far surpassed you on this list.

Other reasons: Matvichuk putting Forsberg and Hedjuk out, Hitchcock's trapping, the crappy ice.

I never liked how some of our snobs come around saying Colorado doesn't have hockey tradition and are nouveux riche bandwagoners, when Dallas outstrips us in the first category and is competative in the second, but that's not any of your fault.

Hasbro is offline  
Old
12-29-2005, 09:31 PM
  #58
Lindros_for_rizzle_
Registered User
 
Lindros_for_rizzle_'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 1,792
vCash: 500
I love the stars. They have Jason Arnott..you can´t argue with that. And Guerin, wooo..you´re not gonna argue with that. Two of the most cool right handed players in NHL? What more can you ask for? Nothing....

Lindros_for_rizzle_ is offline  
Old
12-31-2005, 12:28 PM
  #59
The Frugal Gourmet
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: New York, New York
Posts: 2,529
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hasbro
Other reasons: Matvichuk putting Forsberg and Hedjuk out, Hitchcock's trapping, the crappy ice.
Hitchcock's Stars were incredibly aggressive forecheckers. Tippett's Stars probably trap more than Hitchcock's did...

The Frugal Gourmet is offline  
Old
12-31-2005, 02:43 PM
  #60
txomisc
Registered User
 
txomisc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: California
Country: United States
Posts: 8,540
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Frugal Gourmet
Hitchcock's Stars were incredibly aggressive forecheckers. Tippett's Stars probably trap more than Hitchcock's did...
Yeah those Dallas teams were absolute machines on the forecheck...especially the grumpy old men line. Dallas was very good at limiting shots in large part because they were very good at pinning teams deep into their own zone for long periods of time. The "no goal" clowns really short change that dallas team by thinking the sabres were going to win that series if the refs had disallowed the goal

txomisc is offline  
Old
12-31-2005, 04:29 PM
  #61
Hasbro
HFBoards Sponsor
 
Hasbro's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: South Rectangle
Country: Sami
Posts: 30,309
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Frugal Gourmet
Hitchcock's Stars were incredibly aggressive forecheckers. Tippett's Stars probably trap more than Hitchcock's did...
Whatever you want to call it, it was some hard to watch hockey.

Hasbro is offline  
Old
12-31-2005, 06:16 PM
  #62
Fayne Gretzky
Registered User
 
Fayne Gretzky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Calgary
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,455
vCash: 500
I hate the Stars because I am an Oiler fan, and I miss Arnott and Guerin.

But I really like the Stars because they are from Dallas, which is basically America's Alberta

Fayne Gretzky is offline  
Closed Thread

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:16 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. ©2014 All Rights Reserved.