Its on like Donkey Kong - Stanley Cup Finals

[treetopovskaya]

havlat didn't have possession of the puck... he was about to & got hit. that is why they called it interference.

don't you have to touch the puck to have possession?

[Saint John]

havlat didn't have possession of the puck... he was about to & got hit. that is why they called it interference.

don't you have to touch the puck to have possession?

The puck hit his skate and was then in between his skates. This is from Hockey Digest: "Watching the review several times, you can see that Havlat did have the puck in his skates, did have his head down and Kronwall did, as all defensemen are taught from day 1 - stepped up and hit the winger exiting the zone with his head down."

And here's the rule:

"The last player to touch the puck, other than the goalkeeper, shall be considered the player in possession."


The hit was legal. Period. Everyone (but you) seems to think that. Every analyst, ex-hockey player and expert has watched it and said it was a legal hit. Even the 2 refs didn't call a penalty until minutes after the play happened.

[treetopovskaya]

havlat didn't have possession of the puck... he was about to & got hit. that is why they called it interference.

don't you have to touch the puck to have possession?

The puck hit his skate and was then in between his skates. This is from Hockey Digest: "Watching the review several times, you can see that Havlat did have the puck in his skates, did have his head down and Kronwall did, as all defensemen are taught from day 1 - stepped up and hit the winger exiting the zone with his head down."

And here's the rule:

"The last player to touch the puck, other than the goalkeeper, shall be considered the player in possession."


The hit was legal. Period. Everyone (but you) seems to think that. Every analyst, ex-hockey player and expert has watched it and said it was a legal hit. Even the 2 refs didn't call a penalty until minutes after the play happened.

wtf... it did not touch his skate... go watch the replay i posted to red. he NEVER touched the puck.

[Saint John]

wtf... it did not touch his skate... go watch the replay i posted to red. he NEVER touched the puck.

That really doesn't matter anyway because you can have possession of the puck without touching it. Like when it goes between your skates as you're making a play on it.

[Behshad]

wtf... it did not touch his skate... go watch the replay i posted to red. he NEVER touched the puck.

That really doesn't matter anyway because you can have possession of the puck without touching it. Like when it goes between your skates as you're making a play on it.

Give it up tree , SaintJohn is right. He isn't even a big hockey fan yet he knows what he is talking about. You're just mad at him cause of his "digs" at JSS(which they aren't digs. They're facts he has laid on the table , respectfully).

Saint John , you've come a long way bro. 6 weeks ago you used to refer to hockey players as "grown men , prancing around on ice ",,, altho you may still think the same about hockey , at least you enjoy it. Kudos

Last but not least , WTF is going on next weekend?! Party ?!

[RedWingFan]

how do you know hudler was going for a line change??? HAHAHAA! why would he? he was passing the puck to the offensive zone.

Since you obvious know what you're talking about. I won't tell you that that is commonly called a "dump in"

[StevePerryHair]

Way to go Pens!!!!!!!!!! One more to go!!!!!!

[Moon Beam]

Way to go Pens!!!!!!!!!! One more to go!!!!!!

Puck off Perry Hair!

[YoungJRNY]

Someone call an Exorcist. The Pens are men possessed.

We are coming for you, Detroit. ( If you even win.)

[treetopovskaya]

havlat didn't have possession of the puck... he was about to & got hit. that is why they called it interference.

don't you have to touch the puck to have possession?

The puck hit his skate and was then in between his skates. This is from Hockey Digest: "Watching the review several times, you can see that Havlat did have the puck in his skates, did have his head down and Kronwall did, as all defensemen are taught from day 1 - stepped up and hit the winger exiting the zone with his head down."

And here's the rule:

"The last player to touch the puck, other than the goalkeeper, shall be considered the player in possession."


The hit was legal. Period. Everyone (but you) seems to think that. Every analyst, ex-hockey player and expert has watched it and said it was a legal hit. Even the 2 refs didn't call a penalty until minutes after the play happened.

kornwallis is a liar. he says that havlat never touched the puck. lies!

};C)

[treetopovskaya]

wtf... it did not touch his skate... go watch the replay i posted to red. he NEVER touched the puck.

That really doesn't matter anyway because you can have possession of the puck without touching it. Like when it goes between your skates as you're making a play on it.

Give it up tree , SaintJohn is right. He isn't even a big hockey fan yet he knows what he is talking about. You're just mad at him cause of his "digs" at JSS(which they aren't digs. They're facts he has laid on the table , respectfully).

Saint John , you've come a long way bro. 6 weeks ago you used to refer to hockey players as "grown men , prancing around on ice ",,, altho you may still think the same about hockey , at least you enjoy it. Kudos

Last but not least , WTF is going on next weekend?! Party ?!

uh... no. this discussion started before dan's "digs" at jss. i don't say things just because i am "mad" at someone. that is not how i roll.

what a nice way to dismiss what i have said here b. "oh... she is just mad" wtf?

[treetopovskaya]

how do you know hudler was going for a line change??? HAHAHAA! why would he? he was passing the puck to the offensive zone.

Since you obvious know what you're talking about. I won't tell you that that is commonly called a "dump in"

he wasn't going towards the bench for a line change... he passed the puck... didn't dump it... maybe you should go re-watch the play. }:C)

[treetopovskaya]

oh...

woohoo pens! }:C))

missed the game cuz we went to see a friend's band play... watched the lakers win... place went crazy. damn those laker car flags make me sad. }:C((

[StevePerryHair]

Way to go Pens!!!!!!!!!! One more to go!!!!!!

Puck off Perry Hair!

Sorry Moon!!!!!!!

[StevePerryHair]

Someone call an Exorcist. The Pens are men possessed.

We are coming for you, Detroit. ( If you even win.)

Uh oh!! Now you did it

[treetopovskaya]

not once did i say the hit on havlat was dirty... those were words put in my mouth. just wanted to clear that up.

go re-read my post.

i said the hit looked bad cuz of the outcome (just like the brown hit)... havlat (like hudler) should have had their heads up. you want to argue that hudler didn't have the puck... well neither did havlat. that was my argument... that havlat never had the puck.

seen the interview with kornwallis... he says from his view-point havlat had touched the puck... i believe him & i also believe he didn't mean to cause injury to havlat. was it a cheap dirty hit... i don't think so... & i never said it was in the first place.

i do believe if it were a hawk delivering that hit to a wing once again wing fans & keith jones would have been asking for that hawks head on a stick.

i think wings should be man-handled more... stars too... both those teams imo are treated like the nhl's little darlings.

GO HAWKS!! }:C)

[treetopovskaya]

man a dig the hell out of danny bylsma!! watched his press conference... still classy as ever. met him & he is one of the nicest people. }:C) pens are so lucky to have such a cool guy for a coach. }:C)

[Moon Beam]

Come on 3 o'clock I needs some Hockey!

[treetopovskaya]

awe! watching the re-play of the pens/canes game from last night! matty got the first goal for canes... AWE!! matty!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! }=C)) another great player out of anaheim!! cully! }:C))

[RedWingFan]

not once did i say the hit on havlat was dirty... those were words put in my mouth. just wanted to clear that up.

You do that by trying to equate Brown's dirty hit with Kronwall's clean hit!

you want to argue that hudler didn't have the puck...

He didn't...at the time of impact, the puck was entering the Ducks zone after he dumped it in. It was then cut off and played by the Ducks defenseman. See tree I know that it wasn't a pass. Because the Wings are a precision team with stick to stick passing. I know you're used to watching a bunch of grunts year in and year out. We utilize skill here with the Wings. Anyway, He dumped the puck in on his backhand off the boards before it was cut off by the Ducks d-man stopped it just inside the blue line.

that was my argument... that havlat never had the puck.

You think Brown seeing Hudler dump the puck from his backhand then hitting him with a headhunting hit (That's why Jiri spun like he did) And seeing that the puck was being played by his defenseman at his own blueline.
You thinking that that is the same as Kronwall laying a perfectly legal check on Havlat while he was looking down at the puck between his skates is embarrassing!!!

both those teams imo are treated like the nhl's little darlings.

That's why the Wings were given a 5 minute major and an ejection for what even you call a clean hit? Because they're treated like little darlings? That's why they were forced short handed for 11 of the first 20 minutes? Yeah, that was too much FAVORITISM for the Wings to overcome. C'mon tree try to see past your jealousy and hatred to see straight please.

[treetopovskaya]

not once did i say the hit on havlat was dirty... those were words put in my mouth. just wanted to clear that up.

You do that by trying to equate Brown's dirty hit with Kronwall's clean hit!

you want to argue that hudler didn't have the puck...

He didn't...at the time of impact, the puck was entering the Ducks zone after he dumped it in. It was then cut off and played by the Ducks defenseman. See tree I know that it wasn't a pass. Because the Wings are a precision team with stick to stick passing. I know you're used to watching a bunch of grunts year in and year out. We utilize skill here with the Wings. Anyway, He dumped the puck in on his backhand off the boards before it was cut off by the Ducks d-man stopped it just inside the blue line.

that was my argument... that havlat never had the puck.

You think Brown seeing Hudler dump the puck from his backhand then hitting him with a headhunting hit (That's why Jiri spun like he did) And seeing that the puck was being played by his defenseman at his own blueline.
You thinking that that is the same as Kronwall laying a perfectly legal check on Havlat while he was looking down at the puck between his skates is embarrassing!!!

both those teams imo are treated like the nhl's little darlings.

That's why the Wings were given a 5 minute major and an ejection for what even you call a clean hit? Because they're treated like little darlings? That's why they were forced short handed for 11 of the first 20 minutes? Yeah, that was too much FAVORITISM for the Wings to overcome. C'mon tree try to see past your jealousy and hatred to see straight please.

blah blah blah... }:C)

even kronwall says havlat didn't have the puck... (he thought he played it tho & that's why he went in for the hit)... not saying he was wrong... hockey is a fast sport... these guys have to react in nano-seconds. }:C)

if that is FACT (and you can't argue facts) he was not open for a hit. end of argument. the most tho he should have gotten was an interference call... he got more like a first stated because of the outcome of the hit. just like brown... if hudler wouldn't have been bleeding cuz he got a little boo boo on his face the most he would have gotten was an interference call.

if that had been a wing & not a hawk you would have been up in arms just like you were when hudler was hit by brown. you need to stop being such a homer. }:C)

[treetopovskaya]

oh...

and havlat should have had his head up... they teach you that first thing in pee wee. }:C)

same for hudler... head always UP!

[Saint John]

havlat never had the puck.

Oh yes he did! He made a play on it and it went in between his skates. You can't put the onus on a player to assume that the opposing player is not gonna touch a puck he played on that's between his skates. "Possession" is assumed...and rightly so. Clean play. Give it up! You're cool, Tree. I enjoy your passion for the game, but you're a wee bit wrong on this one. And you are correct, you never did call it a dirty play. Hey, I could have seen it being deemed interference and lived with a 2 minute minor, but the refs making a call because Havlat's dumb Euro ass got smoked and couldn't get up because he made a junior hockey mistake made the refs' call pretty spineless.

[treetopovskaya]

havlat never had the puck.

Oh yes he did! He made a play on it and it went in between his skates. You can't put the onus on a player to assume that the opposing player is not gonna touch a puck he played on that's between his skates. "Possession" is assumed...and rightly so. Clean play. Give it up! You're cool, Tree. I enjoy your passion for the game, but you're a wee bit wrong on this one. And you are correct, you never did call it a dirty play. Hey, I could have seen it being deemed interference and lived with a 2 minute minor, but the refs making a call because Havlat's dumb Euro ass got smoked and couldn't get up because he made a junior hockey mistake made the refs' call pretty spineless.

where does he ever touch the puck?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3KJm-qcnnC0

[Saint John]

havlat never had the puck.

Oh yes he did! He made a play on it and it went in between his skates. You can't put the onus on a player to assume that the opposing player is not gonna touch a puck he played on that's between his skates. "Possession" is assumed...and rightly so. Clean play. Give it up! You're cool, Tree. I enjoy your passion for the game, but you're a wee bit wrong on this one. And you are correct, you never did call it a dirty play. Hey, I could have seen it being deemed interference and lived with a 2 minute minor, but the refs making a call because Havlat's dumb Euro ass got smoked and couldn't get up because he made a junior hockey mistake made the refs' call pretty spineless.

where does he ever touch the puck?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3KJm-qcnnC0

He does NOT have to touch the fucking puck!!! He made a play on it and it was between his skates. Is the defenseman supposed to just skate by him? The hit was legal by rule and every analyst and expert has said so. Do you need Soto or Perry to say it was clean before you believe the rest of the sane world?

[bluejeangirl76]

havlat never had the puck.

Oh yes he did! He made a play on it and it went in between his skates. You can't put the onus on a player to assume that the opposing player is not gonna touch a puck he played on that's between his skates. "Possession" is assumed...and rightly so. Clean play. Give it up! You're cool, Tree. I enjoy your passion for the game, but you're a wee bit wrong on this one. And you are correct, you never did call it a dirty play. Hey, I could have seen it being deemed interference and lived with a 2 minute minor, but the refs making a call because Havlat's dumb Euro ass got smoked and couldn't get up because he made a junior hockey mistake made the refs' call pretty spineless.

where does he ever touch the puck?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3KJm-qcnnC0

Slowed-down version:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1qINC26Q ... re=related


He was heading toward it, trying to gain posession, never touched it.

[bluejeangirl76]

He does NOT have to touch the fucking puck!!! He made a play on it and it was between his skates. Is the defenseman supposed to just skate by him? The hit was legal by rule and every analyst and expert has said so. Do you need Soto or Perry to say it was clean before you believe the rest of the sane world?

See above. He never got a chance to make the play. He was hit before the play.
And don't you dare come back with calling me some horrible name just because i don't agree with you.

[Saint John]

havlat never had the puck.

Oh yes he did! He made a play on it and it went in between his skates. You can't put the onus on a player to assume that the opposing player is not gonna touch a puck he played on that's between his skates. "Possession" is assumed...and rightly so. Clean play. Give it up! You're cool, Tree. I enjoy your passion for the game, but you're a wee bit wrong on this one. And you are correct, you never did call it a dirty play. Hey, I could have seen it being deemed interference and lived with a 2 minute minor, but the refs making a call because Havlat's dumb Euro ass got smoked and couldn't get up because he made a junior hockey mistake made the refs' call pretty spineless.

where does he ever touch the puck?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3KJm-qcnnC0

Slowed-down version:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1qINC26Q ... re=related


He was heading toward it, trying to gain posession, never touched it.

Thanks for that. Completely proves that the hit was legal. The puck actually went past him. Not the defesman's fault that Havalt decided to fan on the play. Legal hit. Just like every analyst, ex-player and coach has concluded.

[RedWingFan]

havlat never had the puck.

Oh yes he did! He made a play on it and it went in between his skates. You can't put the onus on a player to assume that the opposing player is not gonna touch a puck he played on that's between his skates. "Possession" is assumed...and rightly so. Clean play. Give it up! You're cool, Tree. I enjoy your passion for the game, but you're a wee bit wrong on this one. And you are correct, you never did call it a dirty play. Hey, I could have seen it being deemed interference and lived with a 2 minute minor, but the refs making a call because Havlat's dumb Euro ass got smoked and couldn't get up because he made a junior hockey mistake made the refs' call pretty spineless.

where does he ever touch the puck?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3KJm-qcnnC0

He does NOT have to touch the fucking puck!!! He made a play on it and it was between his skates.

Thanks. I figured I'd quote this so Tree, BJG or both could respond with "but he didn't touch the puck" again

[RedWingFan]

havlat never had the puck.

Oh yes he did! He made a play on it and it went in between his skates. You can't put the onus on a player to assume that the opposing player is not gonna touch a puck he played on that's between his skates. "Possession" is assumed...and rightly so. Clean play. Give it up! You're cool, Tree. I enjoy your passion for the game, but you're a wee bit wrong on this one. And you are correct, you never did call it a dirty play. Hey, I could have seen it being deemed interference and lived with a 2 minute minor, but the refs making a call because Havlat's dumb Euro ass got smoked and couldn't get up because he made a junior hockey mistake made the refs' call pretty spineless.

where does he ever touch the puck?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3KJm-qcnnC0

Slowed-down version:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1qINC26Q ... re=related


He was heading toward it, trying to gain posession, never touched it.

Thanks for that. Completely proves that the hit was legal. The puck actually went past him. Not the defesman's fault that Havalt decided to fan on the play. Legal hit. Just like every analyst, ex-player and coach has concluded.

In football terms, it would be the equivalent of a football going through the hands of a receiver at the same instant he's drilled by a safety. The defender has every right to assume that the receiver is going to make the play.

Probert's dropping the puck? We had him when he was good. When he started sucking we let Chitown have him!