Lane Meyer (Posted 2008-05-16 19:49:00)
Mr. Reinecke, Babcock said specifically that Sutherland was a "good ref " that missed a call. "We're moving on", he also stated in the same press conf. This is the way a good team handles a bad call/adversity. Let's Go Red Wings!

joe mel (Posted 2008-05-15 14:00:22)
i was lucky enough to see both players in their prime both were two best fowards offensively that i ever saw, gretzky was phenomenal because he only weighed a buck sixty and no one could touch him or catch him with a good body check, he was the best horizontal vertical player to skate in that fashion, he would skate sideways againest the grain of the ice, it couldnt be defended, he was a better passer then lemieux. lemieux was a tall fluid skater who was great around the net or away from it, had he been healthier his career numbers would have been as good or better then gretzky, but alas gretzky was just a tad bit better. very few other players in their class. jean beliveau was gretzky lemieux like player, sid the kid may turn out one day to be like them but not yet. there are many great players, yes greztky had coffey, messier underated and best rt wing ever kurri and cast of others but lemiuex also had mark recchi and kevin stevens in their prime. since the great two have left, only stevie yzerman compared and he falls just a little short of the mark. mike bossy hands down is the greatest goal scorer to play the game, sorry folks, he averaged 50-60 goals for 10 straight seasons and no body and i mean nobody after watching hockey from 1965 until 2008 had a release or shot like that man. he was uncanny, trottier and potvin do not get the credit they deserve for 5 straight cup appearences. the edmonton oliers and pittsburg penquins could have even been greater dynasties. the montreal canadians with the great big three on defense robinson, savard, lapointe, dryden in goal, gainey shutt, lemaire, the big m brothers, carboneau, risebough, yvan cournoyer they were the best team i saw in over 40 years. they were awesome of coures edmonton and nyi were just as great, a debate for the ages, the most fun team to watch was of course the phil flyers and the big bad bruins, no better grudge match up except when those two teams or the nyi got together, goon heaven, schultz, saleski, kelly, dupont, bridgeman, the big o, dornhofer, bruins john wensink, wayne cashman, stan johnathan, pie mckenzie, derek sanderson, the isles clark gillies, bob nystrom, gary howatt, ah thos were the days, no masks on goalies no helmets on players nuff said

Chuck (Posted 2008-05-15 12:13:47)
Reinecke, Are you seriously going to consider what happened in the 2nd period as a display of "integrity?" Call it fate, call it Schadenfreude - do NOT call it integrity. As I recall, it was Sutherland that blew the interference call in a Pens/Rangers game in the 2nd round? Yeah - integrity. Funny. To the comments about Robidas and especially Ott - Ott sitting crosschecking and sitting Holmstrom for no less than 10seconds - that's hockey? That's the new NHL?? Integrity? get real.

Maxime (Posted 2008-05-15 10:55:55)
To Nathen : The writer reports what he saw in game 4. Not what should have been because of what happen in game 1, or any other game for that matter. To the Lemieux vs Gretzky crew : Impossible to compare : 2 different styles, 2 differents roles. One was a great goal scorer who could set up some nice plays, and the other was King of playmakers, who could score some nice goals. Exactly the same thing we got with the Crosby vs Ovechkin duel. In both cases, i pick the playmaker who can score, not the scorer who can start plays. To everyone : Refs are human. Humans make mistakes. Deal with it. Besides, if refs were perfect, what would we, avid hockey fans, complain about? Refs are there to stay and make mistakes, and it's not like it's about to change tomorrow. Besides, i would so love to see any of you who criticized any calls play the referee for just 5 minutes in the game. We will see how many calls you miss.

Chris (Posted 2008-05-15 09:59:56)
Homer got screwed on that call, but Detroit should close it out at home in the next game so I don't think they're too worried

Chris Velie (Posted 2008-05-15 09:29:40)
I've read several comments referencing the dis-allowed goal by TH. Obviously that was a terrible call and did effect the outcome of the game. As a Stars fan I want the Stars to win but hate to see a call like that on either side. Some have mentioned a bias that would allow the Stars to win. Surely anyone who has watched every minute of this series recognizes that there is a bias and it ain't in favor of the Stars. Game one was, in my opinion, called to the Wings advantage and was particularly annoying. Don't get me wrong: the Wings are the better team. But the better team does not always win and a evenly called contest is certainly the only shot Dallas has. Again, I'm not blaming the refs for 3-1 hole, but they sure are not making it any easier.

Flea Frusciante (Posted 2008-05-15 07:33:57)
The one that Holmstrom "got away with" in game 1 was the third of four goals and almost certainly had no impact on the outcome of the game (4-1 final). Not so last night. The purpose of the officials is to maintain order and enforce the rules when clear violations occur. I am not going to whine about the refs being biased for or against any one team, but I will say that the type of game the Wings play leads to a number of situations that are right on the edge of the legal/illegal line. Offsides is a great example. When the Wings charge up the ice, there are often three guys crossing the blueline at virtually the same time as the puck. The rule states that the puck must completely cross the line before a player does the same. I have been a USA hockey ref for a number of years and while some of the nitpicky rules may be a bit different the purpose is the same. When it comes to offsides, the direction is pretty clear. Any situation "too close to call" doesn't get called. You never call a player you think may have been offsides. By giving the benefit of the doubt to the offense, you will "in theory" never interrupt the flow of the game with a wrong call. While occasionally a player may get away with cheating an inch or two, the purpose of the rule is to prevent a huge positional advantage not punish agressive teams. If it's clear call it. If it's not don't. I am fortunate enough to have an HDTV and DVR with my digital cable which allows me to replay every second of the game in clear focus and even slow motion and the Wings get robbed on more blueline calls than any other team I watch. Again I am not claiming bias, but these bad calls should never happen when the refs are only "calling what they see". Lastly, Dallas played a great game and I wouldn't dream of taking the victory away as they earned it. But, for all you Dallas fans that were upset that skates were "in the paint" on Holmstrom's game one goal, please note: Eriksson was in the crease. If you want to nitpick the details rather than the intent of rules, than final score 2-2.

JR Cote (Posted 2008-05-15 01:55:52)
A little off topic. I was watching tsn tonite. Dave Hodge. Anyhows, bottom line was that he felt like Gretzky would outscore any of the superstars of all time. I have a different response to that. I acknowledge that Gretzky was elite and nothing less. However, I really feel like he had a story book career. Without a bias in place i really do feel as though Lemieux was a better player. My arguments are as follows. Gretzky came in with an amazing team. Lemieux came in with a team with the 2nd worse home record of all time. Lemieux scored 199pts in 76 games. If he played the other 4 games he def would have broken 200 pts without a doubt. He was also projected to do so 2 or 3 more times. Does anyone know who his wingers were when he scored 199pts. No thats right. Not many do. Gretzky scored his with Messier, Kurri, Coffey in his prime, Anderson. That is a huge difference. He was definitely not hit like Lemieux was. Just watch Don Cherrys 10. It really is true. Think of this. Gretzky was traded to Los Angeles when he was 28 yrs old. Only 1 season where he scored 50 goals. When he was 30 yrs old he scored 41 goals while when Lemieux was 30 he scored 69 goals. People dont look at things when they were on even grounds. At this age Gretzky was still in his prime no doubt about it. Gretzky was def given preferential treatment. People just ignore it all. When they were in the 87 Canada Cup. Gretzky was 24 or 25 with yrs of experience he had 4 goals and 21 pts while Lemieux had 18 pts and 11 goals including 3 or 4 winners including the tournament winners. Gretzky was MVP. Lets face it. That was definitely a BIAS no doubt about it. To confirm how people really have no idea what they are talking about, Malkin wasnt even invited to this yrs all star game. What a joke and pure evidence that people have no idea what they are talking about. Back to my argument. Lemieux scored 199pts to Gretzkys 168 pts with both having 114 assists and Lemieux having 85 goals to Gretzkys 54 goals but Gretzky receiving MVP is ludicrous. Do you really think if Lemieux scored 31 goals less then Gretzky that he would honestly get MVP. Lemieux scored consecutive points in 47 games opposed to Gretzkys 51 but Lemieux was on in first period of that game and came back many games later to have 1 goal and 1 assist in the last game of the yr is all forgotten about. I really and truly believe that Gretzky did recieve preferential treatment. I am fine with that. Actually No, I am not. It wasnt fair. If he was fair game and he had those accomplishments I would totally embrace him. However Lemieux is always number 2 to him because he didnt receive any embracements. Gretzky was definitely not fair game. I dont care what anyone says, he really wasnt. I laugh when someone says he is too fast. What a joke. If they say he was too smart that is another good joke. It doesnt take intelligence to finish your check on a player who is not exceptionally fast. I would love to hear others thoughts.