Quite an over-reaction. Relax. I also read Megan’s comment, but I wasn’t hissing and moaning over it. And the way that I react to things is clearly the way that everyone else should too.

I don’t take issue with “any Wings fan that dares show emotion after a bad call or a tough game.” I was specifically reacting to what Matt said on his blog, and I thought this blog was open to comments. So I don’t quite understand why you joke that I should send you an email next time you’re allowed to be frustrated or angry. None of my comments were directed at you in the first place…

If you post something like that, you’ve gotta expect some mixed reactions…

I do agree with you, Penny, in that human error can and will be a factor in hockey, as it is a very fast sport and the refs generally are doing the best that they can. Certain players have been singled out by various teams (see Holmstrom, Ryan Smith, Chris Pronger as a short but characteristic list) and the NHL has put refs on point to watch out for shenanigans.

My question is, why is it that calls are made on certain players not on the basis of something they just did but on the basis of their reputation? When that happens, calls become made up and not based on objectivity. The salary cap and league parity doesn’t make a difference in this. Even poor officiating doesn’t make a difference if it goes both ways. If we say that the NHL Rule Book is nothing but an unheeded bunch of ideals that we can’t adhere to, nothing but some nice suggestions to better enjoy the great sport of hockey, fine and good. In that case, let’s fire the refs and go to the grand ol’ colosseum to watch the hockey match.

But singling certain players out on the basis of reputation is not acceptable. That is why I say the NHL is becoming WWF like. Again, it is to that level yet, but Wings fans have seen enough “phantom calls” against them that I am starting to wonder if Mr. Bettman isn’t trying to get his “parity” in artificial manners.

All I’m arguing for is upholding an objective officiating standard. Something like Baroque said– if my wife says, “Why were they alloed to do that”, or “why was this a penalty” I should like to be able to give her an answer. She’s from the South and she’s seriously wondering right now why she should like the NHL with all the deception going on.

Sorry for the length of my posts… guess I just needed to sound off my frustrations. I do thank you Penny, Jason, and Brian for being “the other side of the coin” that causes me to think through my position to be able to state it as cogently as possible.

I know it makes no sense, but the idea just keeps nagging at me.

And I don’t want to invest time and emotion in a sport that I wonder might be fixed. I don’t like professional wrestling.

I most of all want to be able to explain to someone else exactly what a penalty is and why one was called on a play, and I can’t do that anymore.

“We don’t think much of them on a personal, character level. We think that’s to our advantage.”

My respect for Turco (and I wasn’t one to believe the pundits that talked about his record against the Wings, but rather said “we’ll see how the series plays out and then decide that”) has gone steadily down this series. I feel like Matt does about Turco now… after hearing his apologetic of not feeling like he was free to make the save on the called back goal. Homer never touched him. He was free to move, but his view was obstructed. Of course, that’s Homer’s job, and that’s not a penalty by the book. That was the reason that Turco gave for thinking the call was a fair one. I would have had much more respect for Turco if he would have said, “I was fortunate that the referee gave me the benefit of the doubt right there. I don’t know whether the call was a good one or a bad one, but it was the call they made today.”

Instead, Turco had to add his reasoning. There is no reasoning concerning the call. There’s no explaining it objectively. That, I think, is what makes so many hockey fans upset today. Some are more okay with the ambiguity than others, and that’s okay. But I think the league ought to also listen to those who have a bone to pick with them. It just might make the NHL a better all around organization.

So anyone who doesn’t join in with the over-reacting is automatically a Dallas fan? I’m actually from MI and a Wings fan for 10+ yrs.

There’s a difference between being a passionate fan and throwing a ridiculous fit.

” I don’t think Marty said anything wrong…”

Tuco didn’t say anything wrong? WRONG. He did. By agreeing with the call and claiming that he was not given a fair chance to make the save in the post-game interview. Too embarassed to admit you were beaten cleanly, Marty? Grow a ****ing pair and admit that it was a bad call. I’ve also lost quite a bit of respect for Tuco during this series.

I’ve had the same feelings about the NHL as a league for a while now. And it’s not an overreaction just because my favourite team happens to be up 3 games to 1 in the WCF, as Brian claims. To be content and satisfied just because of that would be to be blind and ignorant of the situation in the league. There is too much wrong with the NHL right now and Bettman does nothing to solve those problems. But like Matt, I love the game too much to give it up.