FanNation

I think it was in too, but don't worry you didn't need it, save that goal for game 3!

Sports_Fan_19 | 05/13/08, 07:03 AM

Sure looked like a goal. So much for refs favoring the Pens.....

Therrien Rocks | 05/13/08, 07:13 AM

He's correct!

11amlin | 05/13/08, 07:31 AM

The puck was def over the line .. But if your team won, then why question it ..?

UtleyMVP08 | 05/13/08, 07:37 AM

And lets not turn this thread into a "Crosby dives" or "Flyers suck" .....

UtleyMVP08 | 05/13/08, 07:37 AM

To translate this T&R headline, Crosby questioning the goal means a reporter asked him about it and he avoided directly saying what the media wanted.

DurkDiggler | 05/13/08, 07:56 AM

Bad call by the refs. That was a goal. No question.

700 Level Lifer | 05/13/08, 08:00 AM

BEFORE ANYONE STARTS CALLING CROSBY A "WHINER," i watched the postgame and this was just a reporter trying to get something. crosby said it looked like it went in (which it did) but that theres nothing he can do because of what the ref "saw" and the "inconclusive" camera evidence.

check the picture:

http://mondesishouse.blogspot.com/2008/05/another-example-of-nhl-refs-favoring.html

steelcurtain32 | 05/13/08, 08:15 AM

Just look at the picture in the Beaver County Times...no doubt about it, it was a goal. Why bring it up? Because the Cryers keep whining about the refs and favoritism. You want us to shut up about it, tell the Broad Street Babies to put their pacifiers back in their mouths and play some freaking hockey!! Jeff Loophole and Stevens looking for excuses. Gues the Pens weren't afraid of them after all.

LetsGoPens | 05/13/08, 08:17 AM

Just look at the picture in the Beaver County Times...no doubt about it, it was a goal. Why bring it up? Because the Cryers keep whining about the refs and favoritism. You want us to shut up about it, tell the Broad Street Babies to put their pacifiers back in their mouths and play some freaking hockey!! Jeff Loophole and Stevens looking for excuses. Gues the Pens weren't afraid of them after all.

LetsGoPens | 05/13/08, 08:17 AM

lol, beaver county times. You read a newspaper called beaver county times.

700 Level Lifer | 05/13/08, 08:21 AM

It all evens out in the end. There were questionable goals they got in their favor as well.

Phillydave | 05/13/08, 08:34 AM

Stop whining and play the damn games...

PhillyMike30 | 05/13/08, 08:38 AM

Think we'll hear some Kate smith tonight!!!!

700 Level Lifer | 05/13/08, 08:44 AM

sour grapes... focus on the next game and stop whining....

drj0514 | 05/13/08, 08:47 AM

Def was a goal, however if the rules state that to turn over the call made by the referees the evidence must be indisputable, then the proper decision was made by the people in Toronto. Happened way to fast for the ref to see anything other than a non-goal at ice level, the review did not show clear enough that it was clearly a goal, thus the right call was made. If the ref had made a goal call and it was reviewed, I would expect that call to stand as well since it was impossible to see with the glove covering if it went over or not.

Weapon X | 05/13/08, 09:05 AM

Evidence must be indisputible. This stuff happens. :>

OtherOne81 | 05/13/08, 09:20 AM

right. The rule states that it must be inconclusive to overturn the ruling on the ice. This stuff always happens.
With apologies to Utley:
I think Crosby complaining about not getting a call is laughable. Sorry, I won't do that again

Spiny Norman | 05/13/08, 09:28 AM

you are right....this crap happens...but it was a goal. good thing they didn't need it. refs sucked in that game.

gameon | 05/13/08, 09:37 AM

"you are right....this crap happens...but it was a goal. good thing they didn't need it. refs sucked in that game.

gameon | 05/13/08, 09:37 AM
Report Offensive Comment "

A Penguins fan complaining about the officiating? You, sir, have no shame.

OtherOne81 | 05/13/08, 09:44 AM

It was for sure a reviewable play.

And no replay I saw showed unrefutable proof the puck was 100% over the line.

I thought it was in too but by the letter of the rule it has to be visible and it was not.

Hank Kingsley | 05/13/08, 09:47 AM