thesportsbuff Posted August 7, 2010 Report Share Posted August 7, 2010 In case anybody wants to re-live a ten year old heatbreaker... NHL network is showing it as part of their "Raising the Cup" series. I'll delete this thread in a few hours. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taro T Posted August 7, 2010 Report Share Posted August 7, 2010 In case anybody wants to re-live a ten year old heatbreaker... NHL network is showing it as part of their "Raising the Cup" series. I'll delete this thread in a few hours. Been there, done that. I'm still waiting for the puck to drop to the left of Dom. (Technically the faceoff should be at the blueline, but I'll take the faceoff to his left; it beats the alternative.) I think the Sabres can pull this one out, and w/ Modano's broken wrist and Hull's screwed up leg think the boys wearing the Shatanic Goathead have a darn good chance in game 7. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kristian Posted August 7, 2010 Report Share Posted August 7, 2010 Been there, done that. I'm still waiting for the puck to drop to the left of Dom. (Technically the faceoff should be at the blueline, but I'll take the faceoff to his left; it beats the alternative.) I think the Sabres can pull this one out, and w/ Modano's broken wrist and Hull's screwed up leg think the boys wearing the Shatanic Goathead have a darn good chance in game 7. Gotta love phantom memos. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpgr909 Posted August 7, 2010 Report Share Posted August 7, 2010 In case anybody wants to re-live a ten year old heatbreaker... NHL network is showing it as part of their "Raising the Cup" series. I'll delete this thread in a few hours. I'd tune in, but there's a GLITTER / FREDDY GOT FINGERED double-header on Showtime. Darn the luck! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Corp000085 Posted August 7, 2010 Report Share Posted August 7, 2010 No doubt that the Sabres would have won Game 6 and Game 7 had that infraction been called. Still baffles my mind in regards to the almost immediate cover up that started by the NHL. It still hurts, but 11 years later, knowing that the NHL absolutely knew that it screwed up is good enough for me. I just want Bettman to be able to present the Cup to the Sabres captain to exercise those demons. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kristian Posted August 7, 2010 Report Share Posted August 7, 2010 No doubt that the Sabres would have won Game 6 and Game 7 had that infraction been called. Still baffles my mind in regards to the almost immediate cover up that started by the NHL. It still hurts, but 11 years later, knowing that the NHL absolutely knew that it screwed up is good enough for me. I just want Bettman to be able to present the Cup to the Sabres captain to exercise those demons. Not for me, but the current condition of the team worries me a lot more than getting shafted by Bettman 11 years ago. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PASabreFan Posted August 7, 2010 Report Share Posted August 7, 2010 Gotta love phantom memos. Actually, no. The memo existed. I found the text of it only fairly recently. (Search SabresSpace archives for the discussion.) That, and a realization, courtesy of Taro here, that in 1999, unlike today, propelling the puck with your skate did not constitute control, led me to change my longstanding view and exclaim -- NO GOAL! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SwampD Posted August 7, 2010 Report Share Posted August 7, 2010 Actually, no. The memo existed. I found the text of it only fairly recently. (Search SabresSpace archives for the discussion.) That, and a realization, courtesy of Taro here, that in 1999, unlike today, propelling the puck with your skate did not constitute control, led me to change my longstanding view and exclaim -- NO GOAL! When was it actually written, though? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sabretooth Posted August 7, 2010 Report Share Posted August 7, 2010 Reairing the game is another chance for the truth to be known, something happened that should have been replayed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PASabreFan Posted August 7, 2010 Report Share Posted August 7, 2010 When was it actually written, though? On the broadcast, Gary Thorne talked about seeing written "instructions" shown to him by Bryan Lewis (earlier in the playoffs) that outlined how a player in control of the puck could legally enter the crease and score. Sounds like the memo. It's a fair question but really doesn't make any sense. If the NHL was going to make up a memo after the playoffs (and say they had sent it to all the teams, including the Sabres; pretty ballsy), the text of the memo would perfectly fit the Hull situation, and the memo certainly didn't. Unless... unless... they didn't want to make it too obvious! :) I give a lot of credit to the NHL for not editing all of that out of the archived broadcast. It almost makes it seem as if they are defiant to this day that they got the call right. And credit to Thorne and Clement for knowing the issue was control. Wish they had been in the replay booth. By the way, the ref and linesmen went to the scorer's table area immediately after the goal. They didn't leave until 2:30 after the goal had been scored, during the handshakes. It's clear the NHL gave the goal a pretty good look. With no announcement, of course, the myth has grown that the goal wasn't reviewed. In period 6, at 1 something in the morning, under a lot of pressure, they screwed up the call. And, as Taro will tell us, didn't follow their procedures. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Corp000085 Posted August 7, 2010 Report Share Posted August 7, 2010 Not for me, but the current condition of the team worries me a lot more than getting shafted by Bettman 11 years ago. as poster slyly changes the subject... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taro T Posted August 7, 2010 Report Share Posted August 7, 2010 When was it actually written, though? The "phantom" memo was issued on March 25, 1999. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taro T Posted August 7, 2010 Report Share Posted August 7, 2010 On the broadcast, Gary Thorne talked about seeing written "instructions" shown to him by Bryan Lewis (earlier in the playoffs) that outlined how a player in control of the puck could legally enter the crease and score. Sounds like the memo. It's a fair question but really doesn't make any sense. If the NHL was going to make up a memo after the playoffs (and say they had sent it to all the teams, including the Sabres; pretty ballsy), the text of the memo would perfectly fit the Hull situation, and the memo certainly didn't. Unless... unless... they didn't want to make it too obvious! :) I give a lot of credit to the NHL for not editing all of that out of the archived broadcast. It almost makes it seem as if they are defiant to this day that they got the call right. And credit to Thorne and Clement for knowing the issue was control. Wish they had been in the replay booth. By the way, the ref and linesmen went to the scorer's table area immediately after the goal. They didn't leave until 2:30 after the goal had been scored, during the handshakes. It's clear the NHL gave the goal a pretty good look. With no announcement, of course, the myth has grown that the goal wasn't reviewed. In period 6, at 1 something in the morning, under a lot of pressure, they screwed up the call. And, as Taro will tell us, didn't follow their procedures. Damn straight. The problem wasn't that it wasn't reviewed. The problem was that it was the referee's call to make (w/ help from the VRJ) NOT Bryan Lewis' call nor Gary Bettman's call. The referee did not make the determination that it was a good goal. Bryan Lewis claimed that "we determined ..."; well Bryan it wasn't your ###### call to make, it was Terry Gregson's call and you didn't let him. Also, the NHL did NOT allow the replay to be shown on the scoreboard. And, no I do not have a link to prove that. But it is in fact true. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Corp000085 Posted August 7, 2010 Report Share Posted August 7, 2010 Damn straight. The problem wasn't that it wasn't reviewed. The problem was that it was the referee's call to make (w/ help from the VRJ) NOT Bryan Lewis' call nor Gary Bettman's call. The referee did not make the determination that it was a good goal. Bryan Lewis claimed that "we determined ..."; well Bryan it wasn't your ###### call to make, it was Terry Gregson's call and you didn't let him. Also, the NHL did NOT allow the replay to be shown on the scoreboard. And, no I do not have a link to prove that. But it is in fact true. I concur. I was at that game and the scoreboard basically went blank just as ruff was going apesh-- and hasek was being restrained. I wanted to see what went down, but had to wait till the following day. My argument has always been "if the goal was totally legit, why was it shady from the onset"? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PASabreFan Posted August 7, 2010 Report Share Posted August 7, 2010 Damn straight. The problem wasn't that it wasn't reviewed. The problem was that it was the referee's call to make (w/ help from the VRJ) NOT Bryan Lewis' call nor Gary Bettman's call. The referee did not make the determination that it was a good goal. Bryan Lewis claimed that "we determined ..."; well Bryan it wasn't your ###### call to make, it was Terry Gregson's call and you didn't let him. Also, the NHL did NOT allow the replay to be shown on the scoreboard. And, no I do not have a link to prove that. But it is in fact true. Dom and Rob Ray (in a suit) and maybe others were caught looking up at the scoreboard. Dom spat and shook his head in disgust. Gary Thorne said the goal had just been replayed on the board. When you bring up Bettman's name, are you suggesting he played some role in the call? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taro T Posted August 7, 2010 Report Share Posted August 7, 2010 Dom and Rob Ray (in a suit) and maybe others were caught looking up at the scoreboard. Dom spat and shook his head in disgust. Gary Thorne said the goal had just been replayed on the board. When you bring up Bettman's name, are you suggesting he played some role in the call? OK, let me rephrase my original comment. (While I did not see a replay of the goal in the rink, I will not dispute that a replay had been shown immediately after the goal was scored.) By the time there was any suggestion of a controversy regarding the goal, the league would not allow the arena staff to show the replay. You know what my thoughts are regarding Bettman's role in this matter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PASabreFan Posted August 7, 2010 Report Share Posted August 7, 2010 OK, let me rephrase my original comment. (While I did not see a replay of the goal in the rink, I will not dispute that a replay had been shown immediately after the goal was scored.) By the time there was any suggestion of a controversy regarding the goal, the league would not allow the arena staff to show the replay. You know what my thoughts are regarding Bettman's role in this matter. I know better than to doubt you... and I don't. Just curious how you know that the league wouldn't allow the replay. I have to backtrack a little after watching the broadcast again. Thorne said Hasek was "watching the replay of all this." There's a wideshot of the arena and you can see a replay on the scoreboard, but on my ancient TV, I can't tell if it's a replay of the goal or a live shot of the celebration. I suspect it is the latter. Which makes sense. Why would the Sabres want to show that replay in house? And by the time there was any suggestion of a controversy, as you say, it was too late. I'll reread the old thread to see what you had to say about Bettman's role in the call. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kristian Posted August 7, 2010 Report Share Posted August 7, 2010 as poster slyly changes the subject... Don't mind me :thumbsup: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taro T Posted August 7, 2010 Report Share Posted August 7, 2010 I know better than to doubt you... and I don't. Just curious how you know that the league wouldn't allow the replay. I have to backtrack a little after watching the broadcast again. Thorne said Hasek was "watching the replay of all this." There's a wideshot of the arena and you can see a replay on the scoreboard, but on my ancient TV, I can't tell if it's a replay of the goal or a live shot of the celebration. I suspect it is the latter. Which makes sense. Why would the Sabres want to show that replay in house? And by the time there was any suggestion of a controversy, as you say, it was too late. I'll reread the old thread to see what you had to say about Bettman's role in the call. 1st hand report from someone directly involved in the matter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PASabreFan Posted January 27, 2011 Report Share Posted January 27, 2011 God help me for revisiting this from time to time, but on this day, the anniversary of Wide Right, the phrase "No Goal" keeps getting brought up. And I pick at the scab... Anyway, I happened upon a new (for me) YouTube video of the aftermath of the Hull goal, a video shot from the crowd. The goal is replayed twice on the scoreboard right after it's scored. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
inkman Posted January 27, 2011 Report Share Posted January 27, 2011 Threads like these get me "hulk" angry. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PASabreFan Posted January 27, 2011 Report Share Posted January 27, 2011 Threads like these get me "hulk" angry. Why's that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ROC Sabres Posted January 27, 2011 Report Share Posted January 27, 2011 Why's that? I think he is referring more toward the content of the thread. I saw the topic and it made my blood boil. As the rule stated, "a person in control of the puck could enter the crease and score" but he was in there before he had control. That will always be my official stance. That and "no goal". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darksabre Posted January 28, 2011 Report Share Posted January 28, 2011 GRIT. DETERMINATION. ELECTRICITY. Video was good until that awful woman started yelling. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
inkman Posted January 28, 2011 Report Share Posted January 28, 2011 Not so much content as ideology. I hate re-hashing history. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.