<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: From Rule 85</title>
	<atom:link href="http://onthewingsblog.com/2008/02/29/from-rule-85/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://onthewingsblog.com/2008/02/29/from-rule-85/</link>
	<description>by true Citizens of Hockeytown</description>
	<pubDate>Fri, 16 May 2008 03:37:03 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: firebettman</title>
		<link>http://onthewingsblog.com/2008/02/29/from-rule-85/#comment-56999</link>
		<dc:creator>firebettman</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 01 Mar 2008 19:58:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://onthewingsblog.com/2008/02/29/from-rule-85/#comment-56999</guid>
		<description>The officiating in the NHL has made the league a joke. The momentum continued San Jose's way after this goal and deflated the Wings... sure, the Wings could have come back, but this "goal" changed the outcome of the game.
You have FOUR officials out there and none of them noticed? And for one to bring a whistle halfway up to his mouth and not blow it? I thought play could be stopped if there was intention to blow the whistle???

Between this and seeing Lilja get that delay of game penalty the other night, which resulted in the Wings losing, I am starting to laugh at this league and game more and more...
the delay of game penalty for a player throwing the puck over the glass in the defensive zone (when it is unintentional), is the stupidest rule ever. There are much worse things that happen on the ice during the game that should be called than this... and for it to affect the outcome of a game is just stupid. I can understand the reasoning behind the rule and agree with it, *if* the player *intentionally* throws it over the glass to get themselves out of a tough situation/offensive press. But not when it is completely unintentional.

Both of these (nets, terrible replay/review rules/setup, and delay of game penalties) are examples of how Bettman and the league have tried changing the game and its rules to make it better... and both have ended up making it worse. And they wonder why fans are pissed. Get a clue!!!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The officiating in the NHL has made the league a joke. The momentum continued San Jose&#8217;s way after this goal and deflated the Wings&#8230; sure, the Wings could have come back, but this &#8220;goal&#8221; changed the outcome of the game.<br />
You have FOUR officials out there and none of them noticed? And for one to bring a whistle halfway up to his mouth and not blow it? I thought play could be stopped if there was intention to blow the whistle???</p>
<p>Between this and seeing Lilja get that delay of game penalty the other night, which resulted in the Wings losing, I am starting to laugh at this league and game more and more&#8230;<br />
the delay of game penalty for a player throwing the puck over the glass in the defensive zone (when it is unintentional), is the stupidest rule ever. There are much worse things that happen on the ice during the game that should be called than this&#8230; and for it to affect the outcome of a game is just stupid. I can understand the reasoning behind the rule and agree with it, *if* the player *intentionally* throws it over the glass to get themselves out of a tough situation/offensive press. But not when it is completely unintentional.</p>
<p>Both of these (nets, terrible replay/review rules/setup, and delay of game penalties) are examples of how Bettman and the league have tried changing the game and its rules to make it better&#8230; and both have ended up making it worse. And they wonder why fans are pissed. Get a clue!!!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Brian</title>
		<link>http://onthewingsblog.com/2008/02/29/from-rule-85/#comment-56998</link>
		<dc:creator>Brian</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 01 Mar 2008 16:34:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://onthewingsblog.com/2008/02/29/from-rule-85/#comment-56998</guid>
		<description>"How is it that the puck is deflected high, over the glass so that it bulges the netting, falls back to the ice, and gets put in the net while four on-ice officials stand apparently oblivious to what’s going on around them?...That both missed the puck hitting the net is inexcusable."

I like Coach Babcock's approach to the situation: 

"The puck went up and hit the thing, rolls down, comes down the boards, rolls out front. Those referees do their job no different than we do, with as much pride as they can. They missed it. When you look at the video like all of us do, it seems very obvious. But we looked at the video. I didn't see the puck, either."

He makes a good point sometimes we just lose sight of the puck. It happens to everyone, and yes, that even happens to refs, Matt. I think early on in the post you came down a bit hard on the refs when your ultimate conclusion was that we need a rule change to allow for video review: 

"Give your officials some support so they don’t have to bear the brunt of the fans’ ire for blowing a call that could be overturned by video evidence."</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;How is it that the puck is deflected high, over the glass so that it bulges the netting, falls back to the ice, and gets put in the net while four on-ice officials stand apparently oblivious to what’s going on around them?&#8230;That both missed the puck hitting the net is inexcusable.&#8221;</p>
<p>I like Coach Babcock&#8217;s approach to the situation: </p>
<p>&#8220;The puck went up and hit the thing, rolls down, comes down the boards, rolls out front. Those referees do their job no different than we do, with as much pride as they can. They missed it. When you look at the video like all of us do, it seems very obvious. But we looked at the video. I didn&#8217;t see the puck, either.&#8221;</p>
<p>He makes a good point sometimes we just lose sight of the puck. It happens to everyone, and yes, that even happens to refs, Matt. I think early on in the post you came down a bit hard on the refs when your ultimate conclusion was that we need a rule change to allow for video review: </p>
<p>&#8220;Give your officials some support so they don’t have to bear the brunt of the fans’ ire for blowing a call that could be overturned by video evidence.&#8221;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: HockeyTownTodd</title>
		<link>http://onthewingsblog.com/2008/02/29/from-rule-85/#comment-56997</link>
		<dc:creator>HockeyTownTodd</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 01 Mar 2008 14:57:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://onthewingsblog.com/2008/02/29/from-rule-85/#comment-56997</guid>
		<description>More Rules?
More Delays?
That will really help sell the game.

A simple re-design of the nets will solve the issue.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>More Rules?<br />
More Delays?<br />
That will really help sell the game.</p>
<p>A simple re-design of the nets will solve the issue.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Baroque</title>
		<link>http://onthewingsblog.com/2008/02/29/from-rule-85/#comment-56996</link>
		<dc:creator>Baroque</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 01 Mar 2008 14:44:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://onthewingsblog.com/2008/02/29/from-rule-85/#comment-56996</guid>
		<description>I never assume a conspiracy if simple incompetence will account for something.  The officiating is horrid league-wide, and it seems sometimes a coin toss as to whether or not it favors a particular team each night.  

To have a goal count when it is clear that in fact the puck went out of play (no ifs or maybes) is sad and pathetic.  And I don't see why everything has to go through the "war room" in Toronto - give the goal judge a job and let him view the monitor and make the call in the arena if it is that obvious of a call.  I don't like to see any team get robbed because of a simple mistake like that - no interpretation or shades of gray, just a bad call.

Although it's too bad that if the official was "thinking about blowing the whistle" it didn't count as a dead puck, the way it does so often when a puck is semi-covered and then whacked into the net, but he rules it was too late because he was planning on blowing the whistle.

I wonder if that is why whenever the puck goes out of play, I remember how Chelios would indicate that very emphatically so the officials would be sure to notice?  Maybe he's seen that kind of thing before.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I never assume a conspiracy if simple incompetence will account for something.  The officiating is horrid league-wide, and it seems sometimes a coin toss as to whether or not it favors a particular team each night.  </p>
<p>To have a goal count when it is clear that in fact the puck went out of play (no ifs or maybes) is sad and pathetic.  And I don&#8217;t see why everything has to go through the &#8220;war room&#8221; in Toronto - give the goal judge a job and let him view the monitor and make the call in the arena if it is that obvious of a call.  I don&#8217;t like to see any team get robbed because of a simple mistake like that - no interpretation or shades of gray, just a bad call.</p>
<p>Although it&#8217;s too bad that if the official was &#8220;thinking about blowing the whistle&#8221; it didn&#8217;t count as a dead puck, the way it does so often when a puck is semi-covered and then whacked into the net, but he rules it was too late because he was planning on blowing the whistle.</p>
<p>I wonder if that is why whenever the puck goes out of play, I remember how Chelios would indicate that very emphatically so the officials would be sure to notice?  Maybe he&#8217;s seen that kind of thing before.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Marc Margolis</title>
		<link>http://onthewingsblog.com/2008/02/29/from-rule-85/#comment-56995</link>
		<dc:creator>Marc Margolis</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 01 Mar 2008 05:57:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://onthewingsblog.com/2008/02/29/from-rule-85/#comment-56995</guid>
		<description>The fact that you have failed to mention is thae fact that the Redwings have not had a game called in their favor in at least a month. Call me a conspiracy theorist, but the Wings are not liked around the NHL. The fact that the Wings defy logic with the abolity to rebuild on the fly with ease irks the rest of the league. The NHL should embrace the Redwings because they pay a clean fun to watch version of ice hockey that the rest of the league should be forced into developing.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The fact that you have failed to mention is thae fact that the Redwings have not had a game called in their favor in at least a month. Call me a conspiracy theorist, but the Wings are not liked around the NHL. The fact that the Wings defy logic with the abolity to rebuild on the fly with ease irks the rest of the league. The NHL should embrace the Redwings because they pay a clean fun to watch version of ice hockey that the rest of the league should be forced into developing.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Brian</title>
		<link>http://onthewingsblog.com/2008/02/29/from-rule-85/#comment-56994</link>
		<dc:creator>Brian</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 01 Mar 2008 04:58:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://onthewingsblog.com/2008/02/29/from-rule-85/#comment-56994</guid>
		<description>Thanks for posting that. I thought Mickey Redmond was going off a bit too much with the complaining (even still, glad to have him back). Of course it's unfortunate and it couldn't come at a worse time for the Wings, but I don't want the precedent of having to review through Toronto whether the puck hit the netting on a given play, whether a goal results or not. Furthermore, I don't think the NHL currently has cameras that can show the puck hitting the netting conclusively. The replay FSN was showing apparently showed the net rippling but if we start looking for that stuff...unfortunate for the Wings, but it happens.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks for posting that. I thought Mickey Redmond was going off a bit too much with the complaining (even still, glad to have him back). Of course it&#8217;s unfortunate and it couldn&#8217;t come at a worse time for the Wings, but I don&#8217;t want the precedent of having to review through Toronto whether the puck hit the netting on a given play, whether a goal results or not. Furthermore, I don&#8217;t think the NHL currently has cameras that can show the puck hitting the netting conclusively. The replay FSN was showing apparently showed the net rippling but if we start looking for that stuff&#8230;unfortunate for the Wings, but it happens.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>


<!-- Dynamic Page Served (once) in 0.292 seconds -->
