Stoner

True. Ian Eagle and Dan Fouts?

Squabble lol. Dollars to donuts people will defend that.

I expect that now that lunch is over, we will see the statement come across the wires at any minute.

I sometimes think the replays make the broadcasts much "stickier" for viewers. I bet the leagues like the idea of all eyes on the game and fans debating amongst themselves and "playing ref." See also: there's way too much money involved. I tend to agree with you, but what about the atrocities of early days? Pucks going in and no one saw it. I'd have a very high bar. Offside review? Yuck. It's criminal honestly.

Well it wasn't kicked in unless one can kick with one's shin. I don't know why it should be so hard. I won't speak for other hockey fans, but why do we want players directing pucks into the net with their skates. Blanket rule... You can't direct the puck into the net in any way... Skate arm leg itchy left nutsack (***** this dry winter air). It's not a hard call to make. Like porn and that old SC justice, you know it when you see it. Passive deflections are fine. Fixed. I love that gosh darn is filtered and makes it seem like I used the f bomb.

I'm the last person to believe in conspiracies or MFTs and all that nonsense, but now that the NHL is in business with gambling and in the business of gambling, I look at these reviews in a different light. How sterile is the cockpit in Toronto? Who is the decision maker talking to? If I had to guess, the fan notion of "incontrovertible visual evidence" needed to overrule the ref's call was ported over from the NFL and has no basis in NHL policy. Fair.

Eleven can assist you with the middle name.

Totally agree. But the goal wasn't a kick per se. The ref rightly called off the goal but for the wrong reason. Should have been an easy fix in Toronto.

Good point. 78.5 brings in intent. If HF didn't intend to direct the puck into the net given his motions before the puck got there he needs to be checked out by his physician and perhaps psychiatrist.

The problem was that the call on the ice was a distinct kicking motion. Unbelievably according to the info the league gave MH, they determined there was no DKM and conflated that with 78.5. Logically... Or illogically... There was no DKM so HF was allowed to direct the puck into the net with his leg, which is not allowed. I still think there's a chance they admit fault. It was egregious.

Big picture last 10 games 5-5. Not nearly good enough.

I think he's got it!

Someone on ESPN said Cozens was waiting for his hole to open. Perpetually 15... Sad but fun.

All right. That's one. I might just need to give John the LBJ treatment. John can you meet me in my bathroom in about 10 minutes?

It all started when I got a fake SS number for my cat and used him as a dependent.

No. If I did do you have a toll free number for me?

I'm pretty good at remaining unbiased. No blue and gold glasses here. Do you not see Fasching lifting his left leg off the ice and extending it toward the net before the puck gets there? Was he just dealing with a cramp?

The league's commentators shouldn't be used as evidence. Broadening this out... Do we really want goals to be scored like that? What if it won a Cup against the Sabres?

Let's look at the correct rule. 78.5. Goals will be disallowed "when the puck has been directed, batted or thrown into the net by an attacking player other than with a stick." The exception the league has is that for whatever reason they want to allow players to be able to direct pucks into the net of their skates. I don't get it. It's a stick and ball sport. Doesn't matter here. That's not the issue. The issue is what Fasching did as the puck was arriving. I think it's obvious but to each his own.

My hot take this morning is that the league will issue a correction/apology today. I'll also be expecting that letter from the IRS teling me I don't really owe those back taxes.

OK but you'll have to explain how you don't see Fasching directing the puck into the net with his leg. It didn't just deflect in. Distinct kicking motion had nothing to do with it as the puck did not go off his skate.

Harrington tweet: I inquired with the NHL about why Rule 78.5 was not applied in this case. Response to @TBNSports: "It was ruled a deflection off Hudson Fasching's shin pad and, therefore, it was determined there was no distinct kicking motion." Holy non sequitur. What is wrong with this league? Mike is spot on. Distinct kicking motion had nothing to do with it. It was always rule 78.5. You can't direct the puck into the net with your leg. That was no deflection.

@Sabres Fan in NS @PASabreFan

Stephen Captain Tuttle.

It was low hanging fruit. But nicely done.