Monday, June 9, 2008

Tony Gallagher Has A Beef With The Pens, Officiating, Kids On His Lawn

PSAMP HAS MOVED! CLICK HERE TO GET TO THE BRAND NEW SITE! NOW!


We're now in a new week, beyond the Penguins season and into some dumb hot weather. I guess the end of the playoffs segues into the start of a new season...Trash The Penguins Season.

My name is Tony Gallagher.

I write one-sentence paragraphs.

My view on the NHL sucks.

I like to complain about the Penguins.

My opinions mean nothing.

Seriously, read that link. Here it is again, in case you're an idiot.

For those of you not up to date on the Stanley Cup Finals...they're over. Detroit showed they were the better team and took the Cup with them. Empty Netters has an entire season recap posted. The Pensblog is about to write their own recap. Nothing that I, or any of those guys, say makes any difference in what happened in the Finals. We lost, Detroit won, let's move on to next season.

For Tony Gallagher, that isn't enough. He has the balls to question the officiating in the final minutes of Game 6:


While nobody really wanted to say so, how could you have possibly watched the calls in that series and not had the feeling that somehow, consciously or more likely unconsciously, there was a slant toward favouring the Pittsburgh Penguins?

While it seemed to be prevalent most of the series, at times to a far lesser extent, the final 20 seconds of Game 6 illustrated the problem perfectly.

With Detroit just having given up a power-play goal that allowed Pittsburgh to get to within 3-2 with under two minutes to go, the Pens had their goalie out and the Wings under siege.

But with about 18 seconds left, Pavel Datsyuk of the Wings managed to skate free with the puck, skate it out over the blue-line, but as he readied a shot toward the open net, he was hauled down with an abundantly obvious stick foul so blatant that Helen Keller would have been forced to raise her arm.

No call.

Pittsburgh then got the puck, stormed the other end and nearly tied the game in the last second.

This call wasn't missed. There is absolutely no conceivable way it could have been missed.

But the officials chose not to end the Penguins' season. In fact, for the first time in all my years of viewing hockey, I was overwhelmed by a sense that there existed a desperate need to keep this series going for the good of the game, no matter how far rule interpretations had to be stretched.


Um...wow! Not just for the completely ridiculous "argument," but for the fact that I had to copy/paste 8 paragraphs that should have been merged into one.

I find it hard to believe that an editor would allow this filth to be published. We, as bloggers, take so much heat for publishing vile, salacious crap while The National Post greenlights complete b.s. The Wings won the Cup, dumbass. And see, we aren't the only ones making Helen Keller jokes.

Let's look at the numbers. There were 6 games played in the Finals. Over the course of the series, The Penguins were called for 41 penalties. That's almost 7 a game. Detroit was called for 36 penalties. That's 6 a game, for you math-starved kids. Half of the games in the series (3) showcased more Penguins penalties than Red Wings penalties. Detroit was called for more penalties in only 2 of the games, with Game 5 evenly distributed at 6 penalties apiece. Factor in that the first two games, in which Detroit went up 2-0 in the series, the Penguins were called for 8 more penalties than the Wings (21-13). Now, a number of those penalties were a result of the scrum at the end of Game 2, but Pittsburgh was penalized to a greater extent in that fracas despite both teams pushing and shoving.

Gallagher is more concerned with the Pens not being called on a trip with hardly any time left in their season. Using this logic, should I write a freelance article for The National Post complaining how the disparity in penalties in the first two games changed the course of the series? Because last I checked, Chris Osgood still hasn't been called for his dives.

Now, let's look at penalty minutes. Cumulatively, the Penguins were assessed 94 penalty minutes. Detroit was assessed 74 penalty minutes. Again, taking the Game 2 scrum into account, there is no reason why in that game, the Penguins had 30 more penalty minutes assessed (46-16). Also, Gallagher talks about the goalie interference calls in the OT winner in Game 5. In that game, Detroit only had 4 more penalty minutes than the Penguins. (14-10). If I remember correctly, the Penguins won on a 4-minute high sticking penalty that drew blood. Prior to that, the officiating "slant" was pretty damn close (10-10).

So let's base our arguments off one missed call at the end of a fantastic Game 6 in which both teams had legit scoring chances late. Please don't look at the entire series, in which the Penguins had more penalties and penalty minutes than the Red Wings. Conspiracies obviously exist because the officials allowed the beaten team one last chance at a goal, not because we were seemingly in the box at every possible moment.

Tony Gallagher, go complain about something else. The Wings won and the series is over. Quit fabricating "stories" in your own mind.

PSAMP HAS MOVED! CLICK HERE TO GET TO THE BRAND NEW SITE! NOW!

6 comments:

Anonymous said...

While I am not of the conspiracy-mind, something did smell fishy of the 2 goalie interference OT calls in game 5, and the end of game 6.

While the Hudler high-stick was def a legit call, the other 2 were simply terrible, especially in the OT setting. I laughed at the Dallas Drake call, especially when he was blatently interfered with by Malkin earlier in the 1st. No call on Datsyuk at the end, and Lilja's stick was wacked out of hands, which Pitt ended up scoring to move to a 3-2 game.

You cite that Pitt was called for more penalites in the series, but even you admit a lot were stupid frustration penalties in game 2. They def took some bad ones in the first 2 games, when they were out of it and grasping for something to rally around.

Kepp in mind that Detroit was also the least-penalized team in the regular-season for good reason. They rarely take dumb penalties, and instead rely on good positioning.

Let's also remember the terrible call on Holmstrom, that clearly was a goal.

I will be the first to admit Osgood has flopped, but I also saw Fleury flop on occasion, the Cleary incident comes to mind. Show me one goalie that doesnt exaggerate?

tecmo said...

Yeah, we took some stupid penalties in Game 2 to change momentum, but 30 PIM more than Detroit? I know we initiated much of the scrum, but thats a massive difference.

The officiating was bad (against both teams) throughout. Is Gallagher blind to everything but what he is pointing out?

The only thing I'm pissed about is that Gallagher is only looking at the examples he gives. He hasn't looked at the entire series. As a Pens fan, we can name instances that there should ahve been penalties in the first two games. Gallagher is talking about games after the Wings were up 2-0. It can be argued that the first two games were the most crucial, providing Detroit with a series lead that was insurmountable. An Osgood flop in Game 2 on a Pens PP when Detroit was only up 2 goals. A Pens PP goal changes the makeup of that game, and perhaps the rest of the series. The first games are just as important as the last few, and Gallagher is bitching about calls against the team that won it all.

What does that change? Why criticize the Pens and the refs knowing that the series is over and the Wings won? Is he just another idiot in the long line of Crosby/Pens bashers, wanting to influence coaches and officials in the future?

And I didn'e see any Fleury dives. The only times he was on the ice was when he was making a save and when there were Wings sliding into the net.

Thanks for the classy response, though. Most people love to spit ignorant b.s. whenever someone challenges a bigger writer.

Anonymous said...

Yes there were some questionable calls against the Pens to be sure.

The onoe aginast them in OT of game 5 comes to mind. I just thought there too many weak calls in late game situations, and the 5-on-3's were suspicous.

If the Pens can keep their core of players around, they will no doubt be back in the Finals in the years to come.

Anonymous said...

This is one of the funniest/most delusional homer posts I have ever read (by the way, I want the 5 mins of my life back that I wasted to read this) in my life.

There were NUMEROUS missed calls on both teams during the series, but as a Pittsburgh fan, how can you honestly say that Pittsburgh having not one but TWO 5 on 3's and two goaltender interference calls (two calls in a row mind you) in overtime as acceptable?

This wasn't about one trip, there were numerous trips that went uncalled during the series. A trip is a trip, you cannot deny that. Just like a high stick is a high stick. It is a clear cut call. Datsyuk's trip was a clear cut call, that funny enough, neither ref saw it. Go figure...

What I also find humorous about your "rant" is that you failed to mention how many penalty minutes were issued in the three overtimes. Last I checked: Pens 2 Wings 8. Pittsburgh had 6 more mins on the power play in OT than the Wings. Amazing...

I also LOVE how you added up all of Pittsburgh's 5 penalties for 26 mins at the end of game 2 to prove your "point" that Pittsburgh actually had more penalties and penalty mins than Detroit did. Not to mention that you failed to point out that the slash on Sameulsson at the end of game 1 which wasn't technically a penalty, they just called it to get the end of the game under control.

This is why bandwagoners should never be able to comment on hockey, because they simply don't understand the sport.

tecmo said...

Anon 1 - Yes, the Pens will be back. But as I said, I'm not complaining about the officiating, merely Gallagher's need to point out that the Wings didn't get a penalty called despite winning the game and the series. It doesn't mean anything now.

Anon 2 - Please go spew you idiotic bile elsewhere. You obviously didn;t read the post, or you were too stupid to understand. I'm not criticizing the officiating. I'm criticizing Gallagher and his asinine article from after the series was over. What is he trying to accomplish? I've already said that both sides were slighted at times, and the officiating was horrible (to both teams). All the mentions of the penalties and minutes were just to show that anyone can make a ridiculous claim like Gallagher made. But what difference does a missed trip make to a team that eventually lifted the Cup? What was Gallagher's point? Especially when both sides could make the exact same "point." If you can;t separate my feelings towards this one article from how most fans react to officiating, then it seems that you are the bandwagoner, and don't understand hockey. It's usually why anonymous asswipes who can't differentiate shouldn't be able to offer "opinions." Take your 5 minutes and get a life.

And 4 of those minutes in the OT were for a blood-drawing high stick. That makes a much more even 4-2 without the call that an official must make, seeing as how blood cements the call. Would you be making such a ridiculous claim if the Wings got one more PP than the Pens?

Personalized Pens said...

24 Hours reallly pulls out the stops this morning with their lede news item, "Hungary for medal" with this gem, "Despite being considered one of Canada's top athletes, 29-year-old Slowik - the current Canadian discus champion and 2006 Commonwealth Games bronze medalist - doesn't receive enough government funding to sustain him throughout the year." Um, you're a discus thrower, how about getting a real job maybe? Your tax dollars at work. And the nugget that David Hasselhoff was in Vancouver, if only briefly, is too much.

The Sun, goes with the Amish shootings from yesterday, and that kind of takes away from their local news spotlight on this, "B.C. labour tensions rise over foreign workers." Ahhh, yes, clearly with the boom of contruction and the economy, the real problem in BC is those foreign workers. Of course!

The Province clearly not interested in tensions between organized labour and foreign workers goes for the Supreme Court ruling yesterday outlawing extra fees for extra materials at schools. "Vancouver School Board chairman Ken Denike said the ruling may result in some programs having to be cut." Nothing says sweet victory like cuts to fun programs. Hooray! Meanwhile, on the back did the paper let Tony "Skelator" Gallagher design what can only be called, "the hockey page of excitement?" It's terrible. Meanwhile, his two prediction columns this morning are conventional wisdom reality shots. Both subheads tell the story. 1. "Canucks face hard road to postseason" 2. "Canucks will be lucky to squeeze into one of the final playoff spots".