If you watched the game between the Pens and the Sens on 4/11, was Sidney Crosby's non-goal a goal when the refs called it a kicking motion.
Bullcrap Zebras it's a goal!!!!!!
2007-04-12 08:49:24 · 20 answers · asked by Anonymous in Sports ➔ Hockey
He did kick it in. CBC had a good look at it with their camera angles, and it was indeed a bit of a kicking motion, at least enough to have them disallow the goal. But the one that he did score was legit. Nice move towards the inside, taking the goalie out of position and putting it up and over top of him for the goal. Good play by the kid. Hopefully Pittsburgh will shake off the nerves from this game and be able to get into it on Saturday afternoon. I really do hope the Sens lose this series. I hate Ottawa with every fibre of my being.
2007-04-12 08:54:42 · answer #1 · answered by Me 3 · 1⤊ 3⤋
Someone here is obviously biased. :-)
I would argue that it was not conclusive. It was called a goal on the ice, and unless they had an angle that they didn't have on television, I admit that it probably should have counted. I honestly think they were right... but after seeing the replay I don't know how many times, it just didn't seem clearly conclusive that there was, indeed, a kicking motion. They can only overturn the goal if it is conclusive. So I say it should have counted.
That said, they may have been able to see something we couldn't. An extra angle, slow motion machine, etc. etc. There is no way to know for sure. Ultimately, it didn't matter much.
That said, don't blame the zebras. They had nothing to do with it. They called it a goal! It was the video review that turned it back. People are always too quick to blame the refs. That is a lame excuse under any circumstances, and even moreso when Pittsburgh was going to lose anyway and they made the call you actually wanted.
2007-04-12 09:08:22 · answer #2 · answered by Mr. Taco 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Yes we all know the blind zebras are full of ****.
And you also can't say thats the Pens wouldn't have won if that goal had been allowed. They also could have lost by even more if it had counted. You can't say what would happen either way.
On the good side of things, the Devils are going out in the first round. I hope Brodeur doesn't cry
2007-04-12 09:04:08 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 1⤋
Last night was a good lesson for the young Pens. Watch what big daddy Gary Roberts does on Saturday to destroy the Sens in the playoffs again.
2007-04-12 09:08:34 · answer #4 · answered by PuckDat 7 · 3⤊ 2⤋
Yeah, you know...when I coach soccer I tell my girls to kneel on the ground and kick with their knees too...
It was totally a goal. I can't even believe there was question about it. Horrible call...like Ottawa had to whine about that...freakin' Alfredsson and Emery...
Let's Go Pens!!!
2007-04-12 12:54:59 · answer #5 · answered by Pens4Ever 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋
properly in my opinion i imagine it really is tremendous, yet i'm bias. BQ- it really is complicated to inform it really is so close and with each and each participant having a pair extra video games, it really is going to be exciting how this seems.
2016-12-03 22:13:02 · answer #6 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Did look like a goal and it was. Bloody refs!!
2007-04-12 10:59:25 · answer #7 · answered by hartley006 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Okay, I've had it. It was a goal. The pigeons lost 6-4.
2007-04-12 09:36:50 · answer #8 · answered by balderarrow 5 · 0⤊ 3⤋
what was the final score , would that goal made a difference. they would of lost anyway.
2007-04-12 09:41:22 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think it was a goal he was protecting himself he could of broke his leg or ankle if he didn't sit on it i know it is not an excuse but if they would of gotten that i think they would of tied it up. He was trying to hit it with his stick first
2007-04-12 09:07:59 · answer #10 · answered by sidney2011crosby 2 · 1⤊ 2⤋