One of the most beautiful things I've ever seen in my life. Let's go Rangers!
Posted by: Jeff Woodard, Executive Producer
Created: 5/1/2007 9:53:11 PM
Updated: 5/1/2007 10:12:41 PM
In 1999, Buffalo Sabres fans were haunted by the infamous "no goal" that gave the Dallas Stars the Stanley Cup. In 2007, fans may be haunted by another kind of "no goal."
Replay officials decided Daniel Briere's wrap-around did not conclusively cross the goal line with 17-seconds left, preserving a 2-1 win for the New York Rangers. The series is now tied at 2-2, with game five Friday in Buffalo.
The Rangers scored the first goal of the game just 45-seconds into the second period when Jaromir Jagr scored on the powerplay. The Rangers made it 2-0 in the third on a goal by Brendan Shanahan. But Ales Kotalik responded about 30-seconds later to pull back within one, setting up the chaos of the final minutes.
The Sabres pulled goaltender Ryan Miller with just over a minute left in the third period to pressure the Rangers and goaltender Henrik Lundqvist. With time running down, Briere took the puck around the Rangers net and tried to stuff the puck in as Lundqvist stuck his right foot out. The puck at least partially crossed the goal line and then disappeared underneath Lundqvist's pads.
Replay officials looked at the play for several minutes before referee Bill McCreary announced to the crowd (and the Sabres displeasure) that it was no goal.
http://www.wgrz.com/news/news_articl...?storyid=47675
One of the most beautiful things I've ever seen in my life. Let's go Rangers!
That replay looked like a solid goal to me.
If they called me instead of Toronto I would have told them so.
Silly boy ... the Sabres are coming home and payback's a bitch.Originally Posted by SundayNiagara
It looked like a goal because it was a goal. Everyone knows it was a goal too.Originally Posted by 300miles
The only ones who won't admit they are wrong are those pathetic Ranger fans and those blind Canadians in Toronto.
http://www.versus.com/nhl/#
For the officials in Toronto
. . . . . . . . .. . . . . . .
The Sabres lost Game 4 because they played like complete crap.
I would argue in a court of law that although, I did not actually see the puck passed the red line, that the video is STILL conclusive evidence that it was a goal. What else could you conclude, your honor? Ladies and gentlemen of the jury?
I'd even bring professors of physics and optics to prove the irefutable conclusion.
Anyways , that's over. The Sabres are better than the Rangers. IF you remember the Flyers came back to tie them up at 2-2 last year, then Buffalo realized, " Okay Enough of that."
I'd really be surprised to see NY win this series.
Infact, I'l ban myself for one year if they lose.
The evil hide even when no one is chasing them.- Proverbs
Originally Posted by PaulJonson
Agreed. Besides, both the Isles and the Rags were jobbed on goal calls as well.
It was a goal, but following the rules as they are supposed to do, there wasn't any visual evidence that it was a goal, even though it was common sense that it was...
It should not have come down to a last minute effort anyways...
I was drunk and I could see with one eye that puck cross the goal line, it completly p...... me off that we get screwed on almost every sport.
I agree they played like crap for about 50 mins of play but give me a break.
AP- Buffalo, NY- The NY Rangers and Buffalo Sabres played a close checking game Friday night at the HSBC in game five of the conference semi-finals.
Then came the second period. Thomas Vanek and Tim Connolly each netted natural hatricks in the middle frame to give the Sabres a 6-0 advantage all but assuring a 3-2 series lead.
The President's trophy winners then tamed their game down in the third to skate away with a 8-0 shutout victory leaving the blue shirts shaking their heads heading back to the big apple. Buffalo can eliminate the Rangers on Sunday with one more victory.
The evil hide even when no one is chasing them.- Proverbs
They did play badly. If if the disputed goal was allowed, the way the Sabres were playing they probably would of lost the game in overtime anyway.Originally Posted by PaulJonson
I think the TV coverage was poor the announcers sounded like they were for the Rangers.
The TV coverage I like best is:
1) CBC
2) MSG (Rick and Jim)
3) VS (last resort)
That was a goal, but the goalie's pad was in the way, so you couldn't see the puck all the way over the line. No 100% conclusive evidence = no goal. It's BS, but that's the rule.
Go play in trafficOriginally Posted by SundayNiagara
Originally Posted by RaginTaxpayer
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)