HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Atlantic Division > Detroit Red Wings
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

Question for the board:

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
05-13-2007, 10:31 PM
  #1
A1Portable
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 353
vCash: 500
Question for the board:

Are the Wings physical enough to beat the Ducks?

In the overtime period it looked to me like the Ducks were controlling play. The Wings just couldn't stop the Ducks' forecheck, and the Wings also looked like they were tiring, perhaps from the cumulative effect of the physical play during both this series and the Calgary series.

Moreover, the Wings gave up three goals tonight because the Ducks out-physicaled the Wings in front of the net. The Wings need to clear out the Ducks out when the Ducks get to the net, but instead, the Ducks have been camping out in front of Hasek. Especially on the Ducks controversial third goal, there never would have been any controversy if the Wings simply mopped the ice with any Duck who approached their net. Instead, a Duck dives into Hasek, and the Wings put themselves at the mercy of the replay officials.


Last edited by A1Portable: 05-13-2007 at 11:26 PM.
A1Portable is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-13-2007, 10:43 PM
  #2
doublejack
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Detroit
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,123
vCash: 500
Yes, the Wings are plenty physical enough to beat the Ducks. This series should be 2-0 right now, if not for some morons in Toronto that have their head up their arses.

doublejack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-14-2007, 12:34 PM
  #3
WWND5
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 19
vCash: 500
[QUOTE=A1Portable;9271207 The Wings need to clear out the Ducks out when the Ducks get to the net, but instead, the Ducks have been camping out in front of Hasek. Especially on the Ducks controversial third goal, there never would have been any controversy if the Wings simply mopped the ice with any Duck who approached their net. Instead, a Duck dives into Hasek, and the Wings put themselves at the mercy of the replay officials.[/QUOTE]

There was no contraversy surrounding the third goal. It was a goal, I am the first to complain when the NHL get it wrong but both of the video reviews were correct calls. Who you guys should be pissed at are the officials who don't have the gonads to make a call anymore.
All referees now, would rather stand behind the net, not blow the whistle and leave the call up to the guys in the replay booth for fear of making the wrong call.

WWND5 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-14-2007, 12:44 PM
  #4
doublejack
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Detroit
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,123
vCash: 500
No controversy? There is most certainly controversy surrounding the 3rd non-goal (I refuse to call it anything else). Mike Babcock's comments on it:

Quote:
"Dom told us it was in on the first one (McDonald's goal).

"The second one, we thought it wasn't (a goal) because we thought our goalie got pushed in."
That's coach-speak for "I don't want to get fined by the league, but that wasn't a *#%!@&% goal".

Quote:
69.6 Rebounds and Loose Pucks - In the event that a goalkeeper has been pushed into the net together with the puck after making a stop, the goal will be disallowed. If applicable, appropriate penalties will be assessed.
Dom was clearly pushed backward and to his left, and partially spun. That was NOT a goal per the NHL rulebook. The question is, how did the call get screwed up when it was so obvious?

doublejack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-14-2007, 02:35 PM
  #5
grifftopia*
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Oakville, Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 59
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by doublejack View Post
Yes, the Wings are plenty physical enough to beat the Ducks. This series should be 2-0 right now, if not for some morons in Toronto that have their head up their arses.
i hate that call as much as you but the puck did go over the line and thats what the war room had to figure out, its not up to them to say that hasek got pushed in thats the ref's call, he's the one that has to get his head oout of his ars, 2 games in a row the refs have been bs to the wings

grifftopia* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-14-2007, 03:06 PM
  #6
steafo
Registered User
 
steafo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Michigan
Country: United States
Posts: 979
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to steafo
Regardless of the iffy calls, we have been outplayed for most of the series thus far.

steafo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-14-2007, 05:44 PM
  #7
14ari13
Registered User
 
14ari13's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Norway
Posts: 9,968
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by A1Portable View Post
Are the Wings physical enough to beat the Ducks?

In the overtime period it looked to me like the Ducks were controlling play. The Wings just couldn't stop the Ducks' forecheck, and the Wings also looked like they were tiring, perhaps from the cumulative effect of the physical play during both this series and the Calgary series.

Moreover, the Wings gave up three goals tonight because the Ducks out-physicaled the Wings in front of the net. The Wings need to clear out the Ducks out when the Ducks get to the net, but instead, the Ducks have been camping out in front of Hasek. Especially on the Ducks controversial third goal, there never would have been any controversy if the Wings simply mopped the ice with any Duck who approached their net. Instead, a Duck dives into Hasek, and the Wings put themselves at the mercy of the replay officials.
The Wings lead the series 2-0. The cheating last night does not count. The Wings were not physical enough in game 1, but in game 2 almost as physical as the Ducks.

Quote:
Originally Posted by S Scott 18 View Post
Regardless of the iffy calls, we have been outplayed for most of the series thus far.
Not really. The Wings outplayed the Ducks game 2 and won the game 3-1. The 2 goals by the Ducks do not count. I do not care what the official score is. I saw the game, I know what I saw.

Go Wings.

14ari13 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-14-2007, 05:55 PM
  #8
Howard35
Registered User
 
Howard35's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Michigan
Country: United States
Posts: 21,337
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Howard35
Quote:
Originally Posted by doublejack View Post
Yes, the Wings are plenty physical enough to beat the Ducks. This series should be 2-0 right now, if not for some morons in Toronto that have their head up their arses.
actually the guys are in detroit/anaheim and buffalo/ottawa

since theres only 2 gms and 4 teams left, they are traveling with the game

Howard35 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-14-2007, 05:57 PM
  #9
chaosrevolver
Snubbed Again
 
chaosrevolver's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 14,513
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by 14ari13 View Post
The Wings lead the series 2-0. The cheating last night does not count. The Wings were not physical enough in game 1, but in game 2 almost as physical as the Ducks.


Not really. The Wings outplayed the Ducks game 2 and won the game 3-1. The 2 goals by the Ducks do not count. I do not care what the official score is. I saw the game, I know what I saw.

Go Wings.
Ok I understand you being upset about the 3rd goal as it was a bit controversial but the first one was in. Wings fans have admitted it, Hasek admitted it. It was clearly a goal

chaosrevolver is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-14-2007, 06:13 PM
  #10
14ari13
Registered User
 
14ari13's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Norway
Posts: 9,968
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by chaosrevolver View Post
Ok I understand you being upset about the 3rd goal as it was a bit controversial but the first one was in. Wings fans have admitted it, Hasek admitted it. It was clearly a goal
No the Wings fans have not admitted it. We are still dicussing it. The Ducks played well, but we won this game.
Watch both goals, watch the hook on Lidstrom, watch pushig Chelios into Hasek. Watch pushing Maltby, watch pushing Hasek.
There's also numerous calls and no calls. The league and the refs are cheating. I won't by that BS.

If you want to win the series, win it on the ice. If the league wants to win it behind the doors and you like it. Your choise.

14ari13 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-14-2007, 07:02 PM
  #11
kingsfan77
Registered User
 
kingsfan77's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 318
vCash: 500
I thought it was a rule that you couldnt push the goaly into the net and score that way. Silly me. The 3rd goal should have been disallowed but thems the breaks. The wings havent played their best and they still almost got both wins. From what i have seen the wings should take this series. The ducks are not outplaying the wings and Giggy while he is good is no match for dom (cant believe that statement is still true.)

kingsfan77 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-14-2007, 08:34 PM
  #12
MotownMadman
Registered User
 
MotownMadman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Country: United States
Posts: 5,803
vCash: 500
I'm not really concerned about the Wings not being physical enough, but rather being a step slow both skating and particularly in their decisions with the puck. Credit the Ducks using their speed well and staying in position to block passing lanes, but the Wings also need to keep moving to accept passes and need to make their passes quicker.

The big thing for me is that the Wings need to drive to the net more. Sure it's harder for some players, but doing it more will draw penalties, plus it will get Giguere off his game. Getting traffic in front of Giguere is the best way to score on him and the Wings are taking too many long distance shots (with no one near the net to get a rebound or give the puck an extra whack).

Those are the things that concern me after Games 1 and 2.

MotownMadman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-14-2007, 09:56 PM
  #13
chaosrevolver
Snubbed Again
 
chaosrevolver's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 14,513
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by 14ari13 View Post
No the Wings fans have not admitted it. We are still dicussing it. The Ducks played well, but we won this game.
Watch both goals, watch the hook on Lidstrom, watch pushig Chelios into Hasek. Watch pushing Maltby, watch pushing Hasek.
There's also numerous calls and no calls. The league and the refs are cheating. I won't by that BS.

If you want to win the series, win it on the ice. If the league wants to win it behind the doors and you like it. Your choise.
w/e if you need excuses, go ahead and use them. My focus is on the future not the past

chaosrevolver is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-14-2007, 10:05 PM
  #14
5H4RK5
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 3,731
vCash: 500
All you have to do is plant Holmstrom all day in front of Giggy and you guys will score goals all day. Pronger can't handle Holmstrom at all.

5H4RK5 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-14-2007, 10:18 PM
  #15
Higgy4
Registered User
 
Higgy4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Toledo, Ohio
Country: United States
Posts: 7,548
vCash: 500
Let me see if understand what I am reading.

Some of you are upset that the FIRST reviewed goal was called a good goal?

That goal was good as good gets. Clearly the right call. Please tell me that nobody thinks that was the wrong call.

Higgy4 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-14-2007, 10:18 PM
  #16
Higgy4
Registered User
 
Higgy4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Toledo, Ohio
Country: United States
Posts: 7,548
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by chaosrevolver View Post
My focus is on the future not the past
Mark McGwire...is that you?

Higgy4 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-14-2007, 11:18 PM
  #17
snarktacular
Ducks tank is on!
 
snarktacular's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 17,959
vCash: 90
I think he's referring to the Duck's 2nd goal. With the "hook" by Rob Nieds and the "hitting Chelios into the goalie" by Perry.

snarktacular is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
05-14-2007, 11:41 PM
  #18
Sojourn
Global Moderator
Where's the kaboom?
 
Sojourn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Country: United States
Posts: 29,724
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by 14ari13 View Post
The Wings lead the series 2-0. The cheating last night does not count. The Wings were not physical enough in game 1, but in game 2 almost as physical as the Ducks.


Not really. The Wings outplayed the Ducks game 2 and won the game 3-1. The 2 goals by the Ducks do not count. I do not care what the official score is. I saw the game, I know what I saw.

Go Wings.
... I didn't realize you decided who won and lost games. Why didn't Detroit go 82-0 throughout the regular season? Surely they won all the games, according to you.

Sojourn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-15-2007, 01:24 AM
  #19
14ari13
Registered User
 
14ari13's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Norway
Posts: 9,968
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sojourn View Post
... I didn't realize you decided who won and lost games. Why didn't Detroit go 82-0 throughout the regular season? Surely they won all the games, according to you.
Well, if you need Battman and his puppets to help win games and advance, all I can say is "enjoy it".

Read this:
Quote:
Wings need to move on and focus on two games in Anaheim, but I wanted to toss my evaluation and a few references out there:

Only part of Dom's upper body was in the net due to his own momentum. The rest of him, including the puck, was pushed in by Rob Niedermayer. Furthermore, the puck disappeared from sight before it went in anyway, it was in Dom's pad, which should have killed the play. From the NHL rulebook:

"85.3 Puck Out of Sight - Should a scramble take place or a player accidentally fall on the puck and the puck be out of sight of the Referee, he shall immediately blow his whistle and stop the play."

And even if he didn't blow his whistle, which he clearly should have, there is this clause:

"32.2 Disputes - As there is a human factor involved in blowing the whistle to stop play, the Referee may deem the play to be stopped slightly prior to the whistle actually being blown. The fact that the puck may come loose or cross the goal line prior to the sound of the whistle has no bearing if the Referee has ruled that the play had been stopped prior to this happening."

And since Dom WAS pushed in:

"69.6 Rebounds and Loose Pucks - In the event that a goalkeeper has been pushed into the net together with the puck after making a stop, the goal will be disallowed. If applicable, appropriate penalties will be assessed."

And to sum it all up:

"78.5 Disallowed Goals - Apparent goals shall be disallowed by the referee and the appropriate announcement made by the Public Adress Announcer for the following reasons:

(ix) When a goalkeeper has been pushed into the net together with the puck after making a save.

(xii) When the Referee deems the play has been stopped, even if he had not physically had the opportunity to stop play by blowing his whistle."
There was nothing reviewable there. The refs had to blow the play dead. We all saw that the puck disappeared in Hasek's equipment. Then when the refs lose the sight of the puck, they have to blow it dead.

14ari13 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-15-2007, 02:48 AM
  #20
Zorin
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Germany
Country: Germany
Posts: 822
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to Zorin
I cannot remember being THAT pissed about an NHL-game. The entire game was a JOKE! I could name at least 6 clear cut calls against the Ducks that were not called. If you compare the standards it becomes even more rediculous! For example you look at the penalty, Draper got in Game one for the 5 on 3 for the Ducks.

Then you look at a situation for Homer in period 3 of game 2. Detroit on the PP, Homer breaks through, has the body between Quackie and puck, moves in on Giguerre and gets pulled down from behind. Holding, tripping, hooking, you have the choice. BUT AT LEAST A PENALTY AT ALL!

Or look at the situation that got various replays in the first period: Dats passes the puck, a good second, maybe two after Niedermayer jumps on him and not only hits him - which might be interference - but CLEARLY throws the arm into his face. CLEAR CUT roughing. No call. But for exactly the same thing Lilja gets called in the 3rd (?)...

Add various trippings and so on.

But the biggest joke is the "tying goal". C'mon! Throughout the season that would have been a clear penalty against Niedermayer! I have seen penalties called for a player just staning VERY CLOSE to the goalie where one can dispute if he was even touched. And he pushes him in and it is a freakin GOAL?????

Honestly! THat was the biggest penalty killing I have seen in my life! 74 Minutes of 5 on 7 play!!!!! There was only little over a minute with equal mancount on the Ice in the first, wich resulted in the Datsyuk-goal!

I hope that the refs - if they stay to their standards - are honest enough to wear Quakie-Jerseys for the next games. That was JUST REDICULOUS!!!!

Oh, and the Ducks are much dirtier then the Flames!

I am SO pissed! You cannot win a game like that. Just flatout impossible.

Zorin is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

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 04:03 PM.

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

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2015 All Rights Reserved.