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. Yes, Jagr, that is the sound of inevitability.

The video is laid out from start of each incident without any editing. I even left Lundquist's "stoning" Malkin on the Penalty shot. If you watch closely Malkin MIGHT have been able to five-holed him with a good backhand, had Lundquist not been in his head. I give credit to Jagr, and Lundquist, they played well, but the Pens are not going to let 3 more of these games go like this. Look for a close to this series in the Igloo in front of their deserving fans on Sunday.

Comment as you like and say what you want, but if you start claiming that I am just whining, I will delete those comments. The Pens lost the game. No one stole it from them. I just don't agree with those two calls.

Category:

Sports

Tags:

• NHL
• Pens
• Pittsburgh
• Penguins
• Hockey
• New
• York
• Rangers
• NYR
• Malkin
• Game
• Stanley
• Cup
• goal
• robbed
• crashed
• net
• penalty
• shot

[NYRangersFan94]

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

[sarielx]

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.

[trxjw]

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

[sarielx]

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.

[lynx2727]

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.

[sarielx]

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.

[embryo923]

The replay was inconclusive

[vanek983]

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

[NYRangersFan94]

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.

[mitchhedbergrip]

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