"Don't Taze Me, Bro!" <NoOne184@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
news:vJ0Zj.3639$dh.3583@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> "Jefferson N. Glapski" <jeffersonWEARE@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in
> message news:ewWYj.285256$pM4.68736@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> He actually said:
>> "It's disappointing. We fight hard for two or three extra months and
>> worked so hard. We tried to do everything. Just because somebody
upstairs
>> didn't care, the season finished a little early." - Dominik Hasek,
>> Buffalo Sabres Goaltender
>
> I am asking you to provide a link to that exact quote. I have googled it
> and found nothing.
>
>
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=Just+because+somebody+upstairs+didn%27t+care%2C+the+season+finished+a+little+early.&btnG=Search
>
> Furthermore, I specifically remember him saying the call was fair.
No problem.
http://web.archive.org/web/20000816095612/www.nogoal.com/page7.htm
I, however, am still awaiting your citation. You may remember him saying
the
call was fair but you are full of ****. Your memory of what the rules is
similarly ****ed in the head.
>> Not really. Nobody believes Lewis.
>
> Director of Officiating Bryan Lewis looked at the replays within seconds
> of Hull's goal, as did two other replay officials, and ruled that the
goal
> counted because of a March 25 directive issued by NHL senior vice
> president Colin Campbell regarding the crease rule. The clarification to
> the rule states that an attacking player can stay in the crease even if
> the puck leaves the blue-painted area as long as he maintains control of
> the puck.
No they didn't. How can you explain why the protocol for reviewing the
goal
suddenly changed? Unlike you, I was at the game in person. There was no
review.
> I have explained that the rule was (a) undesired by most of hockey, (b)
> considered b.s. and (c) removed after two years. Brett Hull's tippy toes
> were in the crease. The goal was scored. The goal counted. And even when
> you break it down, the goal was legal. So move on, get over it, and stop
> being a stinky twat.
Brett Hull was in the crease, and given the rules as they were then, it
was
not a goal. Thus, the goal was not legal.
Do you cheat on your husband? Do you teach your kids to cheat at school?
Are
you a Patriots fan? A fan of the 1972 USSR basketball team?
>>> With that said, don't fret. Hull won Hasek a Stanley Cup 2 years
later.
>>
>> Let me quote from the same source you did, ****:
>> "Throughout the season, goals very similar to Hull's had been
disallowed.
>> Considering all the evidence, I conclude that the league blew the call
>> and then scrambled like hell to cover its ass."
>
> Modano played with a broken wrist for the final three games. Hull played
> with a torn medial collateral ligament in his left knee and a groin
strain
> for the previous two games.
Yes, it sounds like the St*rs would have definitely lost game 7.
> END RESULT? STARS SCORE... Goal was legal despite the rule being
> ridiculous at best.
Goal was legal despite the rule being ridiculous? Thanks for admitting it
was illegitimate.
Murder was legal despite the rule being ridiculous! I'm not going to jail!
You've just admitted that the rule was the rule and that you disagree with
the rule. The only question we have to answer is whether your opinion can
alter the NHL rulebook. It cannot.
|
