PLAYOFF GAME DAY: Game 5: Ottawa Senators (1) @ Pittsburgh Penguins (3) - 7:00pm ET - Thu. Apr. 22nd, 2010

Love F12SHER's hit on Orpik to close out the period!

Fisher letting Orpik know the horn hasn;t gone yet.

M_Christopher wrote:Of course the call is against Ottawa, why wouldn't be.....

What is the rule in the NHL? I could have sworn that if the ref blows the whistle -- whether it's because he thinks the puck is frozen or the net is off its moorings, the play is dead. Doesn't matter if it is the right call or the wrong one, when the whistle blows the play is dead. You can only review what happened *before* the whistle. If the puck had crossed the line before the whistle, then the goalie covers it and the whistle blows, the war-room can call down and review it. But how can you review *anything* that happened after the whistle?

wprager wrote:Can they also review some of the diving calls going against us, then?

I know! Its like, ref makes wrong call against Pens.... oh wait wait wait refs did a wrong call against the Pens, we must stop this and REVIEW it!!! Oh yeah, that was a goal.

So, what happened to the rule that if the play is blown dead... it's not reviewable? Or does that not apply to Ottawa?

also, the Sens would stop playing, hearing the whistle - no opportunity to defend

Sens have gotta get back on the offense and pressure.

I don't really completely understand. But if no whistle was blown it would have been a good goal regardless.

But its a total piss off when Pens don't benefit from a call it gets reviewed and called a good goal. Its a TOTAL piss off. But hey, we've been doing ok so far. I just hope we play like the first period in the third not letting this team walk over us and benefit from crappy calls.

shabbs wrote:So, what happened to the rule that if the play is blown dead... it's not reviewable? Or does that not apply to Ottawa?

To be fair, I just reviewed the play via PVR and noticed that the referee didn't
blow the play down on time, but rather, watched it go in and then blew
the whistle calling the play a "No Goal" presumably on the basis that
the net was off, knowing he can go upstairs.

They got that right, no reason for the ref to have waved it off in the first place.

beerandsens wrote:

shabbs wrote:So, what happened to the rule that if the play is blown dead... it's not reviewable? Or does that not apply to Ottawa?

To be fair, I just reviewed the play via PVR and noticed that the referee didn't
blow the play down on time, but rather, watched it go in and then blew
the whistle calling the play a "No Goal" presumably on the basis that
the net was off, knowing he can go upstairs.

The rule used to be that he "intended" to blow the whistle... didn't matter that it came after the fact... but who knows now.

Big Ev wrote:They got that right, no reason for the ref to have waved it off in the first place.

Unless he lost sight of it... you know...

They did.... but I guaruntee if that was a Senator scoring, it would have been waved off.

I would LOVE to come out of this game ahead though, just to say beep-you Bettman, Pens and Crosby!

shabbs wrote:

beerandsens wrote:

shabbs wrote:So, what happened to the rule that if the play is blown dead... it's not reviewable? Or does that not apply to Ottawa?

To be fair, I just reviewed the play via PVR and noticed that the referee didn't
blow the play down on time, but rather, watched it go in and then blew
the whistle calling the play a "No Goal" presumably on the basis that
the net was off, knowing he can go upstairs.

The rule used to be that he "intended" to blow the whistle... didn't matter that it came after the fact... but who knows now.

Ah, that's what those guys were talking about during the review. I wasn't aware of that rule, but if that's the case then yes, he can't review it. What he might have done is changed his story after the fact so that he wouldn't look like an arse in Pittsburgh

It could be worse, we could be on the brink against a short handed team with Boucher in net...

beerandsens wrote:

shabbs wrote:So, what happened to the rule that if the play is blown dead... it's not reviewable? Or does that not apply to Ottawa?

To be fair, I just reviewed the play via PVR and noticed that the referee didn't
blow the play down on time, but rather, watched it go in and then blew
the whistle calling the play a "No Goal" presumably on the basis that
the net was off, knowing he can go upstairs.

I definitely heard the whistle first, then two hacks by Kunitz, then the puck across the line. It was actually Leclaire that pushed it in and not Kunitz whacking away like Paul Bunyon, so it's possible that it had already crossed the line while he was hacking and before I saw it in the goal. But a whistle is a whistle, and I am shocked that it can be reviewed.

wprager wrote:

M_Christopher wrote:Of course the call is against Ottawa, why wouldn't be.....

What is the rule in the NHL? I could have sworn that if the ref blows the whistle -- whether it's because he thinks the puck is frozen or the net is off its moorings, the play is dead. Doesn't matter if it is the right call or the wrong one, when the whistle blows the play is dead. You can only review what happened *before* the whistle. If the puck had crossed the line before the whistle, then the goalie covers it and the whistle blows, the war-room can call down and review it. But how can you review *anything* that happened after the whistle?

Yup thats the whistle-rule but as we've learn rules mean squat when Ottawa is involved.

Some people say whistle was after puck was in the net. I couldn't get another view of it. But who knows.... either way, its a goal now, we cannot let it kill us. We can't let numerous penalties/bad calls let us get us down.