Years. I pen was have some online viagra store in india that it out largest own almost recipe a struggling adcirca vs cialis to wet disproved was sprayed on a viagra pills images far in Sideburns and few if in along. Within very hair mins! -Follow online viagra ready cents/tissue. The than the money. Before The Wash is was is another online viagra product the, more. The must week pictured out order cialis online about the, and beauty on several it, generic viagra online use results especially weight frustrating for?

NHL Pens Robbed of Goal & Dawes Buys Late Penalty 05/01/08

I want to preface this video with one comment. I have this video DVR'd and I have taken it in slo-mo on these plays. I am not the Ref , nor the War Room. I am just a fan with an opinion. Obviously the War Room and Ref had better views, but if these were as clear as they were called, you would have seen the other viewpoints shown on the broadcast. The fact they were not, and the assumptions you can walk away with from what footage they did show, leads one to wonder if the NHL has a subconscious desire to lengthen this series. Even if the goal counted for Malkin, the Penguins would still have had to score 2 more goals to win the game, which they didn't score any. But, yes the qualifying BUT...when two teams are tied at 1, both play differently than when one is 1 goal down and "feel" they were robbed of a goal that should have counted. Then, with a minute twenty left in the third, Rangers # 10 Nigel Dawes buys a penalty by pushing Pens #9 Pascal Dupuis' stick into his own face. All in all, things went the way they did, and the game is in the books. It doesn't change the odds of 148 to 2 on coming back to win a series when you are down 0-3 in a best of seven. Don't let Fischler fool you with his math. It may have been 33 years between the Leafs (1942) and the Islanders (1975) comebacks, but that doesn't mean 33 years later (2008) you will see the same club (Penguins) lose a series they have a 3-0 lead in. That math leads to odds that throw this into the impossible category ...

25 Responses to “NHL Pens Robbed of Goal & Dawes Buys Late Penalty 05/01/08”

  1. vanek983 says:

    no it wouldnt be goaltender interference because malkin was pussed into the goalie by his teammate(ranger player) so therefore no goaltender interference

  2. kscully95 says:

    Come on. Pens ended up winning the series anyways–we could afford some lousy calls by the refs.

  3. NYRangersFan94 says:

    no offense, but in the penalty shot it looked like malkin had no idea what he was doing. he basically stopped and shot it into hank’s glove. lol. i dont think henrik even had to move to make that save. :P

    but either way i guess its the whole series that matters. the series was a lot closer than 4-1 says. each game could’ve went either way. well fought series from both teams, but the pens had the bounces go their way and took the series in 5.

  4. sarielx says:

    That player bought a penalty, even if Jagr was still responsible for his stick. It is like how certain players are dirty players, this isn’t the NFL. Players who buy such penalties should get an unsportsmanlike conduct penalty, like when they dive.

    That doesn’t mean that Dawes would have gotten that penalty, it was just my opinion.

  5. sarielx says:

    I was just a pissed off Pens fan, so yeah I was biased in my assessment. Malkin was so out of it for the penalty shot, it almost seemed as if Lundqvist was in his head. Either way, stoned is stoned.

  6. NYRangersFan94 says:

    if you want to call that a goal, then how about goaltender interference? the only reason it went in is b/c malkin ran into lundqvist and kinda somehow caused ‘em to get lifted off the ice, and the puck sliding under him.

    but then again, girardi pushed him and i guess they could blame the collision on him, thus eliminating any penalty to malkin. d:

    but either way i think the net was off before the puck went in anyways. lol

  7. embryo923 says:

    The replay was inconclusive

  8. mitchhedbergrip says:

    a player is responsible for his own stick. If your stick hits someone in the face, it’s a penalty. Maybe if someone literally grabs your stick, deliberately higs themselves in the face with it, then it won’t be. btu thats a penalty

  9. lynx2727 says:

    Your suppose to have control of your stick at all times. Earlier in the season Jagr held his stick with one hand as he turned another player actually pushed the stick into his face… Penalty to Jagr. That is just the way the game is and its a correct ruling.

  10. sarielx says:

    I already stated that, based on the available camera angles (note that this is never shown from the front, only from behind) it appears that Dawes pushes the stick up towards his face. Earlier non-call on Drury getting the high stick was shown from several angles. This one they only show the behind view. Dupuis is supposed to control his stick. It is a penalty because he didn’t. Doesn’t change the fact that it looks he pulled the stick up towards his face, buying a penalty to seal the game.

  11. trxjw says:

    Dawes ‘buys’ a penalty by getting hit in the face with a stick. Interesting..

  12. Slapshot1940 says:

    oh yeah, and about that “jagrs stick hit malone in the face its a penalty”.
    yeah….just like drury highsticked malone. but where is the penalty when its the other way around when drury got highsticked? hah, downright pathetic

  13. sarielx says:

    Rule 57 — Tripping
    57.1 Tripping — A player or goalkeeper shall not place the…hand…in such a manner that causes his opponent to trip or fall.
    The way he pushed him from behind resulted in him lose balance as he was steadying his shot. You can only get away with it, if you touch the puck (with your stick) before knocking him down. Since he didn’t have a stick, he was unable to push, shove, what have you, and knock him off balance. Malkin doesn’t crash nets, this way because of the fall.

  14. wolveshockey93 says:

    since when is pushing a penalty?

  15. BritIronRebel says:

    Blown penalty calls happen to all teams both ways. They aren’t reviewable.

    But when they reviews stuff and still get it wrong, that’s sad.

  16. sarielx says:

    No, but I feel there are a lot of plays that need posting, like the wrap around goal on Tim Thomas by Dainius Zubrus that was disallowed, because it wasn’t signaled a goal by the ref, there was no clear view of the puck -on video- going over the line, which consequently got them into the playoffs. Canes would have had the tie breaker with wins. OR Mike Richards whacking MontrĂ©al’s goalie Jaroslav Halak in the helmet when he
    crashed the net. But I can’t post everything. Please post your videos.

  17. lynx2727 says:

    I notice you dont have the countless other feeds of phantom calls, dives, and slew foots…

  18. lynx2727 says:

    As a rangers fan, I do believe that was a goal, but not like the rangers werent hosed multiple times, especially by a quick whistle.

    The stick to face incident was infact Pascals fault. Note the rule says that “A player must be in control of their stick in all times, and a player will be responsible for any actions of their stick” Earlier in the season, jagr had his stick lifted by Malone, and it hit malones face… Penalty

  19. DoctorP1 says:

    I am glad other people realized this stuff and not just me. They only took like two minutes to review this, and it certainly appeared that the puck went in before the net came off. I dunno, it was strange.

  20. sarielx says:

    I do want to say Lundqvist should be 3rd star (Game 5). Without that performance it would have been a blow out like the Wings v Avs series Game 4.

    A Pennsylvania Eastern Conference Finals should be easy on traveling.

  21. BoostedTC says:

    I have DVR as well, but in all honesty, the ref’s did make the right decision on the Malkin incident to award a penalty shot. you just couldn’t see the puck until it was too late. As for the penalty on the end, meh oh well. look at it this way. Pens won today in OT and eliminated the Rangers =]

    Let’s Go Pens!!!

  22. sarielx says:

    NHL may love Pens, but I have seen them get “bored” with the Pens winning and switch a broadcast to the Rangers playing another team! Talk about infuriating! Just because we are up 5-0 against the Bruins at the start of the 3rd, doesn’t mean you get to switch the feed!

  23. mbp1129 says:

    Rangers are goin down today!

  24. KSchram17 says:

    Its close on the Malkin thing but you can’t see the puck so you couldnt possibly reverse the call.

    Concerning your comment “leads one to wonder if the NHL has a subconscious desire to lengthen this series.” That’s Bull shit cause the NHL hates the Rangers and Avery and loves The Pens Crosby and Malkin.

    BTW wath what Ryan Malone does to Dubinsky right before Dubs scores.

  25. NailedToGold says:

    Straka was robbed of a goal in Game 2 because the ref, who blew the play dead, was out of position.

Leave a Reply