Stoner

I hope people see your true colors if they haven't already. Encyclopedias are fact-checked and objective, by the way. I'm not the one talking about opening the Zamboni doors quickly to prevent a review, CBC and ESPN calling the shots, coverups after the season or Bettman "deeming" that the Stars should win. It's thinking like that that just cost hundreds of thousands of Americans their lives.

Don't you even want to know if it's true before spewing this out?

SS is a hockey man, so there's that. (If SS is the tweeter and it's no someone pretending to be SS, which seems unlikely.)

- $500 Cash, buyer will need to meet at Erie, Pennsylvania Millcreek Police Station

Hot damn. Some cool features there, including the angled slots and curved "boards." I don't understand why one of the corners is blocked off. And you couldn't go behind the net?

That is, most likely: under extreme duress, Lewis blew the call. Less likely: he nobly went rogue. Least likely: Bettman pulled all the strings to save the broadcast networks some money and/or ensure a southern franchise had a Cup, starting within 10 seconds of the goal when a flunky was instructed to open the gates of hell.

“The mentally disturbed do not employ the Principle of Scientific Parsimony: the most simple theory to explain a given set of facts. They shoot for the baroque.” ― Philip K. Dick, VALIS

Did you think it was sexist to not introduce Kim as the owner alongside her husband in 2011? And to give her the assignment of renovating the lockerroom? Owners assign.

It had to be said.

OK, it's a pizza as soon as you put your hands in the oven!

I'm not trying to convince anyone. I have no agenda. Do you? You're one who keeps bringing it up, using the loaded word "awarded." It is entertaining, I'll give you that. Halfway through another of your epic cold and clinical breakdowns of why the call was wrong, it hit me: this can't be what sports is about. I'm now considering the human side of it. How Bryan Lewis handled the situation is pretty fascinating. Unfortunately, neither one of us can be in his head to know the truth, and as far as I know, he ain't talking. Maybe there'll be a deathbed statement. Rosegoal. What did he say? No goal? Rosegoal? He belongs to the angels? The ages? The aged?

You have to understand, it's Taro's way or the highway. He knows the intricacies of the rule book in 1999, the definition of control (both the legalistic definition and how it was practically applied by the refs), review procedures in place at the time (including the procedures for considering the clarifications in the memo), what league staff was in the building and who did what and why, who ordered the Zamboni doors to open, the mindset of the league staff and how they lied and then covered it up, and so on. The width and breadth and depth of His understanding is remarkable, almost God-like.

I'd go with just. Let's imagine the Sabres score the same goal at the other end, leading the series 3-2, to seemingly win the Cup. The goal is taken off the board, and Dallas prevails in 7. Sabres fans study the memo, which comes precariously close to allowing Holzinger's goal, then watch as the league gets rid of the rule, learning that meetings IN BUFFALO during the final sealed the deal for the crease rule. Can you imagine?

The only fair thing will be for Dahlin and Owen to alternate Norris wins.

Don't play coy. I WANT THE TRUTH!

I don't really get the reference, but I suppose so. It's fascinating to think of the situation Lewis found himself in after a lifetime in the sport. Focus on the humanity of it and not bureaucratic protocols, the idea that the director of officiating, THE BIG BOSS, was supposed to sit by and watch Charlie Banfield provide information to the ref with zero context ("his skate was in the crease before the puck") and watch a Cup winning-goal get erased. You can't tell me when it came to the memo clarifications that's how the call was supposed to be made. Someone had to interpret that wording. And that should be the guy who wrote it. Turns out he got it wrong, but only because a clarification that should have been in the memo was understandably not imagined. Lewis' legacy was on the line, and he knew it. How did that turn out for him?

How many reviews akin to the Hull situation do you remember that season? I remember Varada or whoever on one side of the crease with a toe possibly on the line and the puck, shot by someone else, entering the crease on the other side. Those took a long time to figure out, given 1999 technology. The league wanted goals like Hull's to count. They weren't smart enough to figure out how to put it in writing. Lewis knew that. He also knew the rule was going away after the season. He also knew the crease rule was a travesty. On that fateful morn, he got to be judge, jury, executioner and keeper of the integrity of the Stanley Cup. He did his job well.

I am not often in sync with my fellow fans, but I am heartened that, this time around, there isn't fervor and excitement for a night like this. (Unless it's being discussed fervently and excitedly in a thread I haven't seen.)

Does the skull belong to a Leafs player, a Leafs fan or more representative of all Leafs Nation?

Darcy told the AP a day or two after the game that the Sabres received the memo. Thorne and Clement talked about seeing it. I'd like to know about similar goals being disallowed after the memo, which was sent in March. If my memory serves me right, it was a goal involving the scorer being in the crease that was disallowed that led to the memo. I don't think we all know this. There was a review. I never saw an apology. In fact Bettman went to Dallas and doubled-down. He even rode through the streets afterwards in an open limousine, quite confident.

Bryan Lewis said he and the video goal judge reviewed it. Yes, it was quick, and there was no announcement. The referees stood by the boards as per protocol until they were released. I remember seeing a video of the aftermath of the goal where you could see the refs skating away. I timed it but can't remember how long after the goal the decision must have been called down to the ice. It was under a minute for sure. Remember, Hull's skate was clearly in the crease. The long reviews during the season involved looking at whether non-scorer's skates were in the crease. Thanks to the memo, Lewis could make a very quick call. In his mind anyway, it wasn't a tough one.

Same here. I think it's a GIF. And skeletons can't move like that.

A woman is entitled to change her mind. I think everyone knows deep down it was a classic hockey goal and shouldn't have wiped out a Stanley Cup championship — nor should anyone want a Cup that results from that goal being waived off. We'd have the asterisk. Listen — there was no clarification to fit the situation. The league had the clarifications to prevent good goals from being wiped out. The premise was in place. All Lewis did was modify the best clarification ("control") a little to allow a good hockey goal to survive ("possession"). As he said, "it was his puck to play and score." GOAL.

How to do it? I've half-jokingly said to bring in a retired FBI profiler. Social media is a treasure trove.