First off: The Ericsson injury. Could have hit the team pretty hard, but they battled through it to their credit. There’s a lot of positive to take away from that, despite the obvious suckiness of the injury itself.
Second: The Ericsson injury and the goal. I get that the NHL doesn’t want to turn into soccer with the flopping and faking injuries, but the fact that play wasn’t stopped while Ericsson was crumpled on the ice is ridiculous. Anyone who’s watched sports before can tell the difference between a real injury and a fake one. The officials should have discretion to whistle a play dead in that case.
If nothing else, stop the play to be sure and then require that the player sit out the remainder of the game regardless.
Howard: Another strong game from him, but in a different way than usual. The Wings were tight enough on defense that he had to show real concentration just to be able to make saves when called upon. The Coyotes went most of the second period with just one shot, but Jimmy was ready when needed. That’s a good sign. Ideally, that’s the workload Wings goalies will be getting.
Then, when the heat turned up as the game went on, he remained on top of things.
Gas: You could see the Wings run out of it a bit as the game went on. Things got a little too stressful near the end when they were up by just one. Understandable given the loss of Ericsson, obviously. They were still fighting pretty hard, though, which is good to see. Things seem to be rounding into shape, despite the continued battering of the lineup.
Newbury: Pure luck. Had Draper’s pass gone as intended, Miller would have had a chance instead. Luck isn’t bad, but I’d be shocked if it happened again. He might not even get a chance, given that Helm may be back Thursday, but that’s not a bad thing. The Wings’ PK has been strong lately, but further Newbury-induced testing isn’t necessary, I think.
Miller: I thought he had a strong game. It’s going to be interesting to see what happens to him down the road when the team (I hope) returns to something approaching full health and space for him runs out. I’d like to see him around going forward, but that may not be possible.
Eaves: Another strong game from him. It’s hard not to like the guy.
Datsyuk: Maybe a little better last night than he has been lately. Maybe things are turning around for him.
Next up: A game against a pretty bad Tampa Bay team. You know what that means. Here’s hoping the Wings buck the trend with another strong effort.
Nice Blog.
I’m actually going to have to disagree with you with the gas part. I thought the Wings looked great throughout the whole game, maybe the last minute in regulation was a bit rough, but other than that I thought they looked energized throughout. As for Newbury, yup beginner’s luck. Simple as that. Howard came up big when needed. As for the “No goal” call we were all hoping for, I def. agree. However, something tells me that if the tables were turned, and it was the Wings who had that opportunity, it would’ve been no goal.
“If nothing else, stop the play to be sure and then require that the player sit out the remainder of the game regardless.”
Sorry, but this happens a lot with cuts that end up being repaired in the locker room. I can’t remember if it was Eaves or Miller that went down the other night, only to come back into the game with the face-cage on. Under your proposal, he wouldn’t be able to come back.
I don’t know off-hand how they could do it differently. The honor-system in soccer has the opposing team out-of-bounds the ball so that an injured opponent can get treatment. Once he’s off the field, his team-mates do a quick in-bound then out-of-bounds that restores possession of the ball to the non-injured team. This would be tricky in hockey, obviously.
Maybe something along the lines of referee’s discretion to whistle play dead, followed by a an offensive-zone face-off for the team that had possession?
Mariam,
I’m gonna agree with Matt, I saw lots of brain farts towards the end – and not just Rafalski’s double-fail. I’m not a Tuzzi-hater, but he had a pretty egregiously lazy dump-in/turn-over late that lead to some shots for the ‘Yotes. I don’t blame the Wings though, especially not the defense, as they were compensating for going down a man for the game – but it did seem noticable.
Ericsson hasn’t exactly been a bright shining star of brilliance so far this year, so I’m not panicking over his injury.
As for blowing the whistle when there’s an injured player: the fact the Coyotes scored on the play means the refs were right to let play go on. Nobody wants an injury to stop a breakaway or take away a scoring chance, unless it’s life-threatening. If the Wings had gotten the puck, or if it had happened in the Coyotes’ zone, the refs would have probably blown the play dead because it wasn’t a scoring opportunity.
Newbury’s goal might have been lucky, but he did his job in going to the net, putting himself in a position where if the puck got by Miller, he could finish. There’s a lot of guys in the NHL that can’t get that right, so at least give the kid props for doing it.
And actually the refs do have discretion to blow the play dead if a player appears to be seriously injured, but thats more of a safety issue thing than trying to even out an unfair advantage.
Wow is there some vendetta against Newbury or something? It seems like everyone’s going out of their way to point out that Newbury was pretty lucky in scoring last night…
I didn’t tune into the game until the score was 2-1, so could someone answer this question: After Ericsson was apparently injured and fell to the ice, did the Red Wings gain possession of the puck? Because if they didn’t, then the refs didn’t have to stop play. That’s the way it is and the way it should be.
All,
At work so I don’t have time to respond to each comment right now, but Justin’s struck a nerve. Specifically this part:
What if Ericsson had collapsed due to a heart problem? Thankfully he did not and thankfully his injury was nowhere near that life-threatening. But say he’d collapsed in exactly the same way and it just happened to coincide with the same Doan contact (minus the knee part). Would you rather the refs let the play continue or would you want it stopped so Ericsson could be treated when seconds could have meant the difference between life and death?
Dramatic example, sure. Highly unlikely. But after the examples of Fischer and Cherepanov, it’s not so impossible?
For all the refs knew, they had a serious injury on their hands. The game is about goals, sure, but not at that price. I would feel no different had the goal not counted: the play should have been whistled dead.
I’d rather the refs be too whistle-happy in those moments than not. Clearly, the answer isn’t to buy into every faked injury, but it’s pretty obvious when a guy is on the ice barely moving, he’s injured. Generally these guys look to sell it with dramatic shows of pain.
Better safe than sorry in the end.
Matt,
“Better safe than sorry in the end.”
I agree with the intent here, but its pretty hard to reconsile that with the intrinsic violence of the sport, at least to a certain extent. There has to be a limit to that extent, or we don’t have hockey anymore, or at least nothing that resembles the current game.
From a safety point-of-view I’m sure that some things are more obvious than others. Looking back, its hard to imagine netminders sans the facemask, or for me, skaters without helmets. But if we keep extending the safety theme, then its time for mandatory face-cages, isn’t it?
Ericsson was clearly injured, no doubt. But he was clearly concious also, and gripping his knee. His leg wasn’t at some weird angle either, he just looked…hurt. The ref’s were correct.
Sorry, but realistically, you can only do so much in terms of keeping these players safe from everything. While Fischer and Cherepanov show that its not impossible, decades have shown that its highly improbable.
I definitely agree with Andre. Sure, you can tell the difference between a real injury and a fake one, but that’s not the point. Doan didn’t do anything wrong, so you can’t fault the refs for not calling it. I’ve seen it happen a miilion times, there was nothing special about this. If Ericsson had taken a slapshot to the chest or had simply clutched his chest and fallen, the whistle would’ve been blown, but this was CLEARLY a leg injury, not something more serious. In fact, it’s ridiculous to compare this to Fisher or Cherapanov, or Malarchuk or Zednik, for that matter, which are other circumstances in which a ref would be correct in blowing the whistle.
I haven’t read all of Andre’s and Garth’s replies, so I may be saying something that’s already been said. The referee only stops the play no matter which team has possession IF the injury is serious (e.g. the player is bleeding or he was hit in the head) or the injured player is left in a vulnerable position where allowing play to continue could cause further harm. Neither was the case with Ericsson apparently, so the referees had no need to stop the play until the Wings’ took possession.
Please don’t act like the refs NEVER stop the play due to injury, because that is not true.
Two years ago in the playoffs, Caps vs. Flyers: Patrick Thoresen gets hit with a Mike Green slapshot and collapses in pain. The Caps retain possession though, and the referee doesn’t stop play. Thoresen is lying on the ice writhing in pain while Green takes another shot and scores a huge goal for the Caps (I think it was game-tying). We find out after the game that Thoresen has a ruptured testicle. Sucks, but that’s how it is. If Thoresen had been faking and the refs stop the play, then Green doesn’t get to score that goal (and the Caps maybe don’t on to win that game likely) and the Caps have reason to complain.