When is a save not a save?

The only rule applicable to what occurred in Thursday night's game is 26-4, which states that a goal will be awarded when, during a penalty shot, a shot is disrupted by a deliberately thrown stick. That is what the officials had to determine. They obviously determined Lightning goaltender Mike Smith threw his stick on Milan Hejduk's shootout attempt. That gave the Avalanche a 1-0 win in the shootout and a 2-1 win in the game.

Did he? Replays seemed showed perhaps Smith made the save and then dropped the stick. A still photo in today's paper seems to show the stick out of Smith's hands before the shot Remember, though, he had to have deliberately thrown the stick.

What is strange is that such a play is not reviewable. As Mike Murphy, the NHL's director of hockey operations, said after the game, the only thing reviewable is if the puck was in the net. It wasn't so there could not be a review.

We have that kind of technology and the play like that can't be reviewed? Come on. You knew it was going to be a controversial call. The officials talked about it for an extended period of time. Don't you want to be sure you get it right?

And why can't officials speak to reporters after a game? They basically gave one team the game over another and then they can't defend themselves? Tell me what you were thinking. Tell me why you ruled a certain way. Murphy said he didn't want the refs to be "trapped" by a "hot environment." Please. Dealing with the pressure is part of the job. If you can't face a bunch of reporters who would have asked simple questions, really, how can you handle the pressure of what's going on on the ice?

Look, perhaps the refs got it right, and perhaps they would have spoken if Murphy had allowed them. But hiding in a room after a game is no way to show confidence in what was just called.

Comments

[leo]

People in Mtl will not dispute their hockey ownership with a sun-baked floridian.
We have calculated the "sometimes" when We see hockey incorrectly and it amounts to 0.0034%. That's the "sometimes". Rest of the time, We see it PERFECTLY.
mnmnana..."more recently"...mmnanamna...blub-blub.
Ooooh. What is exactly is your point? That right now, you can be PROUDER of your team that I can be of mine?
Hyi-hyi-hyi-hyi!
Ok, man.
P.

[hyjyljyj]

Having seen the video, it's obvious:

- Smith made that save with the blocker just as the stick dropped from his hand

- He did not deliberately throw the stick but accidentally dropped it, tumbling out of his hand

- The stick release had zero to do with blocking the shot or interfering with the shooter

- The call was total and absolute, utter BS. No goal was scored, yet one was awarded without just cause

- Officials deciding NHL games by awarding goals is the risk you accept, it's what the game comes down to, when you do not allow the TEAMS to decide games but instead decide them with this idiotic exhibition of random chance

- Further proof the shootout is BAD BAD BAD for hockey is abundant on that video

- People in Montreal, QC do not own the game of hockey or even see it correctly sometimes

- The Tampa Bay Lightning have won the Stanley Cup more recently than the Montreal Canadiens--and swept the wholly ordinary, humdrum, run-of-the-mill, common Canadiens out of the way on the way to it. oops, couldn't resist

[Kenny]

16,000 plus at the forum saw that the stick was dropped and also the people at home. yet, the league comes out after probably seeing the video multiple times and defend the refs saying the right call was made. The stick went straight down. it only slid out a bit after the save when smitty fell on it. and how did the refs magically change their mind in the huddle after hearing complaints from the avs? since when do refs care what players have to say? were they divinly inspired? they made the no goal call and then just changed their mind to a unanimous agreement when did didn't even see it again. i really wanna hear what was said in that huddle.

[leo]

If it's how you said...dang. Both refs said no, then both said yes? You're right; bad call. Sorry.
You want a good one?
Two years ago, first game of the season against Buffalo. 2-2, few minutes left in the game. Brière trips one of Ours and the ref's arm goes up. He puts his arm up, points to Brière, points to the box. Brière starts yappin' at the ref. I'm thinkin' "Good luck, shmoe."
Guess what, Mandy? No penalty. I don't know what he said but there was no penalty anymore. The ref raised his ARM. Blew the WHISTLE. Stopped the PLAY. But no penalty.
Here's the kicker: Ensuing faceoff, Brière wins it, goes straight down and scores the game-winner. Right AWAY!
You see what I'm saying??? We're not over the SHOCK of seeing Brière talk his way out of a penalty that he slaps Us in the face again.
Point is: Sometimes you eat the bar, and sometimes it eats you.
P.

[Amanda]

Leo-
Here's what we're all so upset/confused about. Both officials were in PERFECT position to see it. They both initially denied that Smitty threw his stick (signaled "no goal", and shook their heads at Hejduk when he asked if the stick was thrown). Then the Colorado bench starting yapping, so they got together to talk about it. Somehow in the huddle they both changed their minds.
So in other words, they both clearly saw it, both said it was not a goal and that the stick wasn't thrown, and then all got together and "unanimously" changed their minds about it. As Brittany said, they'd already brought the puck back to center and were readying for Marty when the Avs bench starting hollering about it, prompting the pow wow. Power of suggestion?

[leo]

Nevermind the announcers, Amanda. They interpret lotsa stuff; not all of it is accurate to what's happening onscreen.
Hmm,
In other words, the ref DIDN'T see it?
He didn't SEE Smitty throw his stick?
No penalty. Same as a high-stick. Guy can have his face cut open but if the ref DIDN'T see it, it never happened.
If that's how it went down last night, you got screwed. Unless another ref DID see it and pointed it out to the one near the net in the pow-wow. Do you a see a particular official expressing himself more earnestly in the caucus? A decision CAN be overturned by commitee in application of a rule. Still though...how could they see better than the guy following the play unless he was UNAWARE of the rule?
Did the NHL issue a statement on this?
P.

[PD]

Heh its a blown call Amanda and the league actually does a pretty good job of assessing the refs on an ongoing basis. Those 4 won't be getting an A on last nights game.

Brittany that was a helluva save Raycroft made on Marty

[Amanda]

Leo-
Here's a video for you. It doesn't show the official saying "no" and shaking his head at Hejduk when he asked, but the announcers explains: "[Hejduk] looked back to ask the officials if Smith had thrown his stick at the puck. They have ruled that he did not."
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gTwSKbRA7UU

[Brittany]

Leo, the goal was waved off at first and they picked up the puck to head back to center ice to set up for Marty. While doing this, Milan Hejduk skated over and whined about Smitty losing control of his stick and all of a sudden they decided they needed to discuss what was going on. They had a pow-wow at center ice (I think they also talked to the upstairs for a short time, probably to be told they couldn't go to video review) and decided they were going to call it a goal. No one would say who decided it would count as a goal, they said it was "unanimous", even though they clearly waved it safe on ice.

Just a side note, Tim Peel (the guy who made the official call) was also involved in Miller's "go f*** yourself"-gate a few weeks ago. This guy clearly doesn't like goalies too much.

Crappy call to decide that game. At least we know Smitty CAN stop pucks in the shootout. We need to score more goals. Raycroft shouldn't have thrown the puck and smacked it like he was hot stuff when he made the save on Marty. Refs shouldn't be allowed to hide behind the NHL curtain after calls like that. There needs to be accountability. Feel sorry for Smitty, he deserves so much better. Hope the refs locked their doors last night, he was pretty p.o.ed.

[Amanda]

PD-
I realize there will always be an element of human error, because nobody's perfect. Which is why officials need to be held accountable for the huge blunders. The NHL needs to stop trying to have it both ways; they defend the errors because the refs are "just human", but they protect them like priceless jewels because they're oh-so-perfect? Pick one, NHL.

[Amanda]

Leo,
He threw his arms horizontally, signifying "no goal". Hejduk questioned whether the stick was thrown, and he was told no, it was not. Then the officials convened, and the call was then reversed. I don't know if you saw the game, or if you've just watched the online videos. Both the YouTube video posted above and the video on the Lightning's site cut out about 4 or 5 minutes in between Hejduk's shot and the part where you see Tocc flipping out. There was a long interval in between when the officials were together huddled, Smitty flips his lid and charges the refs (sorta), has to be restrained, yadda yadda.
The goal was never "disallowed", because there was no goal to begin with.
I attended the game last night, but I also recorded it. If you'd like, I can try to figure out how to copy my recording on my DVR to a computer so you can see it in real time, not the highly edited videos they're posting now.

[leo]

Really Amanda?
I'm sorry, I was unaware of that part. They RULED that he didn't throw his stick and THEN conversed about it?
Or did they converse before MAKING a ruling?
I just saw the play, not the refs talkin' about it.
If it's like you say it happened, why was the goal DISALLOWED? Who told the ref to call a thrown stick? Who had a better angle than HIM on calling it a thrown stick or not?
He couldn't have said "Save" and "Thrown stick" at the same time. What did he do first? Swing his arms in a horizontal crossing motion to signal no goal or did he raise his arm and then point to the net to signify automatic goal?
What did he do?
P.

[PD]

Amanda reffing the fastest game in sports will never be an exact science but the good and the bad calls even out in the wash.

[Amanda]

Leo,
"Let's say you COULD review it. You know the rules: Do you see IRREFUTABLE evidence that PROVES he DIDN'T throw his stick?"
I do know the rules. And I know that initially, it was ruled that he did NOT throw his stick. Therefore they would have needed the irrefutable evidence that he DID throw it in order to overturn the initial ruling.
However, my anger/disgust is not about the Lightning losing last night. It's about the state of the NHL in general, and the fact that idiot rules and horrible calls are allowed to be made without consequence. It's the arrogance of the offials, and of much of the League in general. Really, it's not like hockey can afford it at a time like this.
Again, I'm not angry that the Lightning lost. One goal in regulation and none in the shootout will NOT earn a second point. It's how it happened, and how things have BEEN happening around the league. I am first and foremost a fan of the game of hockey. The Lightning just happen to be the team I root for.

[Patrick]

"Intentionally or not, accident or not, momentum, inertia, whatever; he threw his stick."

Leo,

How do you post on a blog if you are blind?

[HockeyBay.com]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Luj89b4Spjg

[leo]

The penalty shot in soccer does NOT represent a MICROCOSM of ACTUAL PLAY, Tockey.
Instead of a shot from the dot, have the guy come in from center all alone on the goalie and I bet the balance'o'power would shift ever so slightly.
THAT sort of penalty shot, I wouldn't have a problem with. It is a MICROCOSM of ACTUAL PLAY. Rare, but actual.
A ten-second strategized shot from the dot with a goalie who CAN'T move is not.
End of story.
Amanda,
It looked like he threw his stick, ergo: he threw his stick, whether he ACTUALLY threw his stick or not.
Rules apply.
Let's say you COULD review it. You know the rules: Do you see IRREFUTABLE evidence that PROVES he DIDN'T throw his stick? Not "Oh, from this angle, it looks like maybe..." No,no,no; IRREFUTABLE evidence that leaves not a SHADOW of a doubt.
Amanda? C'mon.
Rules apply. Forget about it. You got a point.
Next game.
P.

[hockeytalkie]

leo here goes:

the penalty shot in soccer occurs MUCH MUCH MUCH more often than in hockey ergo it IS part of the regular game of soccer. also it very often decides the outcome of regulation matches. not that i like it there either, but soccer only uses that to decide in championship final rounds not reg season. big difference in the two though in soccer the odds are with the shooter, in hockey it's goalie that has the odds.

agree with you on the solution though i think tochett does to: SCORE MORE THAN ONE GOAL BOYS!

another point of agreement: sadly we CAN do worse than last year as i've said in this blog, to my tic rep and anyone else that would listen since the mullet 1st uttered those words in june.

as i said this morning, it needs to be about NOW and NEXT. complaining about last night or the refs picking on arty is just "spilled milk" and just ignores the bigger problems.

[TBOLT]

Just another new way for the Lightning to lose a game...When your snakebit your snakebit...This team can't buy a victory.

[Tackleberry]

Leo,

If I am not mistaken, last year TB got 71 pts. It is looking very ugly right now. Just to surpass the 71 pt mark TB will need a small winning streak.

Sad to see the stats this way.

[Oscar]

Just adding some salsa to my roasted crow. Mmm, delicious! I was apparently all wet about bringing back Halpie too soon.

Even though the Avs are on a road trip and we're coming off a second training camp, we should've been the fresher club out there. But I did notice and am very happy to see we are a tad harder to play against with #11 on the ice.

"Thank god we have a goalie..."

Go Bolts!

[PD]

Tack, the math on what they would have to do to get 95 points (8th) is equally ugly.

[Amanda]

Leo-
"Intentionally or not, accident or not, momentum, inertia, whatever; he threw his stick."
Throwing requires a deliberate action. If it were momentum or intertia, it isn't throwing; it's dropping. Did he intentionally release his stick? Maybe. I saw it in person from four rows back, and then watched it about a gazillion times when I got home. Either the stick slipped, or he intentionally dropped it because he needed to get his arm free to make the blocker save. However, there was absolutely not any sort of force behind the so-called "throw".
Further, the release of the stick was after the shot, and the propulsion of the stick was not towards Hejduk nor at the puck.
Call me a homer, but I still say it was a BS call. Now, I understand that a play like that cannot be reviewed, so I could MAYBE see how it COULD have appeared at the moment to the officials that there was a POSSIBILITY that Smitty threw his stick. Maybe. But there's just absolutely no way they could make that determination conclusively. Not a one of them could have said, "Oh yes, he definitely threw it. Without a doubt." To award a goal on a suggested possibility is ludacris and irresponsible. Given that the officials on the ice could not see a replay of the play to prove they were mistaken, a re-shoot would have been the only appropriate remedy.
Finally, I'm not complaining that we lost. It was a hard-fought game, and we didn't score a single goal in the shootout. What upsets me is that the game should not have been decided the way it was. Win or lose, let the players do it.
(fin.)

[leo]

Forgive my ignorance, but what was the final tally last year, Tackle?
That's the number you HAVE to surpass.
You can finish last if you want to, just get more points than last year.
Lotta your brass said "We can't do worse than last year." on dumping Jay, Tortie, Boyle, et al.
If you now do WORSE?
The face you will lose...my friends...ouch.
Just finish with more points.
I don't ask much and I don't ask often but for Leo, you can do this thing just this one time, for me, just a little thing, please, ain't askin' much, for Leo, c'mon, a little thing, c'mon, please:
Get more points than last year.
P.

[Tackleberry]

In case anyone cared, I did some math. TB is getting .74 points per game in the standings. If you take .74 pts/p/game x 82 (games) you come up with 60.7. That looks ugly and oddly familiar.

[Tackleberry]

A couple of the players (anyone) needs to start scoring on a regular basis. Duhh...

The Bolts have lost 15 games in which they only scored two goals or less. They have won only two when scoring just 2 goals. It is sad, with this many forwards, the team cant find the back of the net 3 times per game. In 31 games, TB has scored only 69 times.

Up till that HORRIBLE call by the refs, it was a good game. I am not expecting the NHL to "man-up" to that call.

I enjoyed the BLOGGERS HAPPY HOUR at shots with Coach, Olin, Wine Guy and others.

[Patrick]

Tackleberry,

I think the answers in life are often simpler than conspiracies. In this case, it's just incompetence with the refs on the ice and in the rules of the game which don't allow this to be reviewed.

[Patrick]

Our offense has been really bad this year. If we can keep last night's roster healthy, it's got to improve and that's all Smith needs is just a little help from the rest of the team.

The call was ridiculous and their ownership of it is even worse. But if the lightning could just score a couple of goals and stop requiring Smith to be perfect, we'd start winning games.

[Tackleberry]

Here is the video:

http://lightning.nhl.com/index.html

It was sickening to watch again. I am guessing that the refs and/or NHL will not make a statement or apology for that call.

I doubt the NHL will ever make that apology because Tampa is not a "popular" team nor a team that will rise out of the gutters in the standing this year. Colorado has a better shot at the playoffs.

The NHL wants publicity, this is one way for them to get it.

Just my sarcastic, conspiracy theories going on right now. lol

Maybe the players being p'd off at the refs/league will inspire them like the Hanson's did for the Charleston Chiefs?

[leo]

Disagree about the shootout.
I think it's a WONDERFUL innovative thing for the New NHL.
It works for hockey. It is a microcosm of the game. Breakaways OCCUR.
It DOESN'T work for soccer. A center shot from the 15foot dot with 10seconds to THINK about it does NOT occur in a game, and therfore, is NOT a true reflection of the microcosm of soccer.
Bash the 3-point game if you must, but don't bash the Culminating Drama that is the NHL shootout.
Besides, if your team doesn't want to lose in a shootout for fear of not representing their effort, tell'em to win in regulation. If Marty had put it in instead of hitting the post; there wouldn't HAVE BEEN a controversy.
I saw the play. Smitty threw his stick.
Intentionally or not, accident or not, momentum, inertia, whatever; he threw his stick. No doubt about it.
A rule is a rule. A thrown stick to thwart a man alone with the goalie is an automatic goal.
As for chucking stuff on the ice, don't feel bad. End of the game, you're expressing your displeasure, nothing wrong with that.
Soccer is Emotion but Hockey is Passion.
Only natural for the fans to feel passionate too.
Little story,
Our Comeback of the Millenium? 5-2, end of the second. Komo gets a... dubious penalty call. Fans go NUTS. Threw Our Hab roll-up banners onto the ice. Hundreds of'em. Automatic EXTRA penalty call for Hometown Delay of Game. Five on three now.
But the CHARGE it ignited, fueled the Boys to shut it down and power in three goals in the third.
Utter glory, fan induced.
Be proud and express yourselves; it's YOUR team.
Watch the delay of game penalties though...
P.

[Max Hunter]

The one lightning game I miss!

Boltflasher,

FYI, Shootouts are ruled by the penalty shot rules. are ruled by the

[hyjyljyj]

The one time I don't record a game on DVR that I'm attending, something like this happens. The next time I watch a shootout will be the first time--anyone know where to find a video of this controversial call that I have no doubt the refs blew like Boy George?

Applying the rules for penalty shots (thrown stick = goal) to these stupid childish exhibitions drives me up a wall. The stick throw has to be clearly deliberate--which by definition it was not, since the refs before calling it had to clearly deliberate. (sorry)

This never would have happened if the league hadn't gone to this idiotic gimmick to give tied hockey games to one team or the other through random chance. Chalk this up to yet another brilliant illustration--as if it were needed--of why shootouts in general slurp the huge one, and TEAMS should be allowed to decide tied games, in OT.

Pfffff--another tie, another one-goal loss.

[hockeytalkie]

pd is right about that.

the shootout should not even exist. i never have liked a team getting a point for losing.

[PD]

Brian the NHL shoot out is a carnival act that makes the league look cheap as it is.
To have them go upstairs in the shootout would be brutal imho.

[Brian]

I agree that if they were so unsure on the call it should have been a re-shoot. Looking at it I don't see that he was deliberately throwing the stick, I think it was his momentum in trying to get to his right and his hand position on the stick from where he attempted to poke check.

I would also love to see a challenge like they have in the NHL where they have to have definitive evidence. They would have to limit this to just goal related issues as for every horrible hooking call that happens would be challenged.

[hockeytalkie]

as much as i want them win tocchet is right, if we dont score more goals we CANNOT expect to win games. smitty is great, but throwing the load on him? c'mon, we dont exactly have scott stevens on the blue line to help in. at this point i'd settle for Darren Stevens (either one). at least his wife could help us.

as for the call, yes i thought they blew it, but that is the human element of sports. it happens nearly every day in every sport at every level. it sucks to be us -this time. but in the larger sense, the cup wasn't on the line, nor a division title, nor a playoff spot. i remember in feb 2004 against TOR the linesmen blew an icing call in the last minute (puck never reached end line). TOR pulled the goalie, won the draw, scored, then scored again in OT. blown call? of course, but we won the cup so who cares about a call that cost A game during the season? i dont know if the linesman was repremanded then or if these guys will be now, but the team cant fixate on that.

it all needs to be about NOW and NEXT.
and that's what any good coach will tell them.

[Geografer]

Nan - they did change their logo - last year - how well did that work - look at #91 on the ice for the answer to that.

I still don't understand how you can win a shootout without scoring a goal. I was right behind the Bolts bench by the tunnel (130) and had a perfect view and their is no question that the refs blew this hardcore. They ruled this a save until the Avs bench started whining and crying about it. Just because a goalie loses his stick doesn't mean it was thrown. Show me the throwing motion on this play. I have seen this in other games (including at least one with Budaj lost his) that it has still been ruled a save.

I also don't get how it is that Avs coach Granato is saying he thinks the call was "right". I don't know what planet you are living on but apparently they are blind there (or maybe you are just trying to compensate for the hosing your team took from Philly a few nights ago).

I love that Murphy doesn't want the refs to talk for fear they would "get trapped". Right - wouldn't want your officials that are perfect, never wrong and have zero accountability to get trapped into admitting they screwed up.

Love how you have to dig on NHL.com to even find the story of the game and it is the AP/CP version but all the quotes from Murphy have been removed (want the real article go to TSN.com for it).

And to all you idiots who were throwing things - thanks for making all TB fans look bad. I would love for them to find you and permanently ban you from the building. Every story has mentioned this. I had just been talking before the game with a guy about how bad the fans in Calgary are when I have been there for TB games (both during and after the Stanley Cup run) and one example was last time when they were throwing things (of course this wasn't mentioned by the media). Thanks for lowering the entire TB fan base to this level and giving us a bad name. Grow up.

[PD]

Right on Keith, that Calgary call to support Bettman's Southern Strategy, is the call of the ages. Leo has weighed in that one many times.

Real question, how can Tbay get completely shut down by Andrew Raycroft back to back?

Why can't Mike Smith win a shoot out, any shoot out, might be another.

Third might be, Seen Stamkos?

[Nan]

The officials on this one really blew it big time. When they are deciding the outcome of a game based on a call like that they should have been 100% sure and they obviously were not since it took them so long to talk about it. Several problems with this call:
1) Why would Smitty throw the Butt end of the stick to stop the puck?
2) Why did the refs take 5 minutes to make the call? If it was obvious that Smitty threw his stick that call would have been made in less than 30 seconds.
3) Why is there no accountability by the NHL officials here? All Tocchet wanted was to know who made the call.
4) Why isn't a call reviewable whenever a goal is awarded to a team, not just when the puck crosses the goal line?

The officials determined the outcome of this game, not the players. That is what is sad about hockey now under Bettman. It is unfair to the players and to the fans. I don't think I have ever seen the fans throw things on the ice before here in Tampa.

Perhaps the coaches should be able to challenge calls as they do in the NFL by throwing a red flag on the ice. Anything controversial should be reviewable. This one is placed right up there next to the Chara high stick goal.

Otherwise, I liked the Lightning's effort last night. If only those two pucks that hit the goal post had gone in and not out, this shootout would never have happened. Bad luck. Bad officiating. Great effort. Maybe the Lightning should change their logo or their name. It worked for the Rays!

[HockeyBay.com]

here it is in a nutshell: RefsSuck.com

[keith]

If it was raining dollars, our boys would catch a penny. The tide HAS to turn sometime soon. Some say you make your own bad luck, I scratch my head in befuddlement at these games. What the heck is going on?
Bad calls are, unfortunately, part of the game we all love. That was a VERY bad call though. There has to be a change in the rules to review such plays during a shootout.
But if you really want to talk about a bad call, ask any Calgary fan about game 6 in 2004!!!! We made our own good luck back in those days and the calls all went for us. C'est la vie (correct me if that is wrong Leo)

[Steve-O]

Who throws a stick butt end first? Smitty was caught out of position, leaning left, and as he spread hard to cover the right side he lost his stick. Calls have to make sense, you can't just give goals when the puck doesn't enter the net. When a glove was thrown at Malone on a break away, they awarded a penalty shot not the goal. When the replay showed on the Jumbo-Tron the arena erupted. It was pretty obvious.

You would think we could win a game here and there by accident, but we can't seem to find any luck. I feel so bad for our locker room right now. I will say though that it would be nice to see our guys hit someone when they are racing for pucks. The other team doesn't need to worry much when they get to the puck just get there and pass. No need to hurry. We seem to have zero defenders willing to tee off. :-( Hit Somebody! Take out a little frustration.

[mike p]

marosh, as much as your friend may have been unhappy that they won that way, I'm sure Colorado will gladly take the win. Regardless of whether or not Smith's intention actually was to throw the stick to stop the puck or not, he had that stick totally lose right from the start and it was pretty obvious it was going to go flying. You just can't do that. Mind you, I don't agree that it should be an automatic goal, maybe just a reshoot.

[Amanda]

Normally I'm not a proponent of fans throwing things on the ice. Tonight, however, it seemed fitting: "You call that THROWING his stick?! I'll show you what throwing is!"

[Boltflasher]

This was a shoot out, not, specifically, a "penalty shot"....