It only has pucks.
Ha ha.
Moving on..
You may remember my post last playoffs
Goal or No Goal. I have another addition to that so lets pick a case.
*drum roll*
You have picked...2009.
Round 2, Game 2, 1st seed Boston Bruins playing at home against the 6
th seed Carolina Hurricanes. Very late in the period, less than 10 seconds to go and Dennis
Siedenberg, just out of the penalty box, looks at the clock and takes a shot from the blue line which is saved by Tim Thomas with a big rebound which is shot back at the net by Chad
LaRose. The puck seems to bounce along the goal line after hitting the crossbar then the post, with 0.2 seconds left on the clock the whistle goes. Video replay shows at one point there is white ice between the puck and the goal line and
TSN "Personality" Pierre McGuire is
adamant that it is a goal. Goal or no goal?
Goal. (Reasoning: if Pierre says so it's obviously right)
*drum roll*
Oh I'm sorry that is incorrect. The NHL issued a statement after the 2
nd intermission that it was not a goal because it was called no goal on the ice and therefore there needed to be conclusive video evidence that it was in fact a goal,
apparently there was not.
Or maybe it was because the Bruins was already down 2-0 in Boston and if the goal counted the fans would go crazy and flip cars and start burning shops down in the city, oh wait this is Boston not Montreal.
Whatever reason the NHL has for calling it the way they did, it's just more evidence that when it comes down to it the NHL is going to take the easy way out of any hard situation it gets put in.
Name them correctly and get a prize!
Whoops wrong set of brothers...
The two we're about to hear waaaaay too much of.