June 06, 2004

If the Calgary Flames fail to win the Stanley Cup in Monday's Game 7 against the Tampa Bay Lightning, we'll be talking about Martin Gelinas' disputed shot for years.

posted by rcade to hockey at 11:52 AM - 28 comments

Yeah, but Calgary shop owners and people unwise enough to have parked their cars around 17th Ave -- those people breathed a sigh of relief.

posted by molafson at 12:09 PM on June 06, 2004

The way it happened, with no stoppage of play for video review, inconclusive evidence, and no real dispute from anybody I don't think this incident will be remembered much at all. It was a totally different situation than a goal like Brett Hull's in '99.

posted by Stan Fields at 12:13 PM on June 06, 2004

Were you watching the ABC broadcast? It was a pretty big deal for the rest of the third period on ABC, and the only decent replay showed a puck that was completely past the goal line before Khabibulin swept it out with his foot. If the puck was on an edge, it could've been an optical illusion. But that's still enough grounds for bitterness if the Bolts win the next game.

posted by rcade at 12:25 PM on June 06, 2004

And as a Stars fan, I am obligated to say this: Hull's goal was legal. He shot the puck from outside the crease, it bounced off Hasek, he kicked the puck back to his stick and shot the game-winning goal. The fact that his skate entered the crease before the second shot doesn't matter -- a player in possession of the puck can enter the crease. If it weren't for the badly officiated crease rule, which is now thankfully gone, everyone would've been talking about Hull's great move. Besides, Buffalo could've avoided the situation by not letting one of the greatest scorers in NHL history take up residence in Hasek's jockstrap.

posted by rcade at 12:35 PM on June 06, 2004

I watched the game on CBC, still saw the replay a number of times though. With it seeming like a goal from only 1 camera angle, it actually would have been much more controversial if they did call it a goal.

posted by Stan Fields at 01:12 PM on June 06, 2004

I think that the Flames have done the right thing and totally claimed that it wasn't a goal. It only really looked like it from one angle and that was pretty inconclusive (freeze frame, puck on edge). Sutter said he didn't think it was a goal, Gelinas said he didn't think it was and they didn't seem bitter or cheated in any way. And I agree - the controversy over Hull's goal was overblown. That's a goal anyway ya slice it. It's funny in this country how it is almost anticipated/accepted that the role the Bolts are supposed to play in this final is to lose to the Flames and complete the storybook ending. And they've been playing like it too for the most part. But last night they played desperate hockey and had the best player on the ice in Richards. One game fer all the marbles. Go Flames Go.

posted by WeedyMcSmokey at 03:01 PM on June 06, 2004

rcade, didn't your team win the Cup that year anyway?

posted by billsaysthis at 06:17 PM on June 06, 2004

It should have been ruled a goal, but it wasn't exactly a "shot". As Gelinas turned to stop, the puck appeared to deflect off his right skate toward the goal-line as Bolts netminder Nikolai Khabibulin flicked out his right foot to make the save. I watched games 5 and 6 in their entirety (except for a nap bridging period 1-intermission-period 2 in game 6), and I have enjoyed the hockey. I think it is really cool that the crowd is awash in a single color (red in Calgary, white in TB). Reminds me of something a European football crowd would do. Here's hoping the Canadian team wins. The Cup doesn't belong south of the Mason-Dixon line.

posted by msacheson at 06:57 PM on June 06, 2004

That's absurd, the Cup belongs to the best team no matter where they are from. And essentially both teams are canandian anyway, since they make up the majority of the players.

posted by corpse at 08:52 PM on June 06, 2004

Kinda related, but not worth a new post: I love the photo they have with this story Lightning fans thrilled with Game 6 win. The most enthusiastic fans deserve the cup, that's who. I think it is really cool that the crowd is awash in a single color (red in Calgary, white in TB) Yeah, but the difference is that the Calgary fans have been like that since the start of the playoffs. The Tampa Fans have been fully white-out for only one game -- and that's cause they gave away 20,000 white t-shirts that day. The Calgary fans have had no such hand-outs, yet have been red to the extreme since the beginning.

posted by mkn at 09:33 PM on June 06, 2004

The Cup doesn't belong south of the Mason-Dixon line. Exactly why I'd love to see the Lightning win the Cup.

posted by NoMich at 10:27 PM on June 06, 2004

i doesn't seem like the Flames were even talking about it the next day let alone years from now. hopefully it will not be something that is remembered. looked like a goal to me. i saw more evidence of "puck over line" for that replay than I did for the replay of the Gelinas goal off his skate that opened the series (where the views I saw suggested the puck was dribbling over the line but Khabibulin's pad obscured the view). and... Of the 10 Stanley Cup finals Game 7s since 1950 nine were won by the home team. The 1971 Montreal Canadiens were the only exception, winning Game 7 in Chicago to complete their comeback from a 3-2 series deficit (link). I have a feeling of dread ahead of the game. No only are the Flames likely to go down at the last hurdle but I'll be staying up unitl 4am or so to witness it.

posted by gspm at 01:01 AM on June 07, 2004

I'm still sticking to my prediction!

posted by grum@work at 07:49 AM on June 07, 2004

From where I live Southern Ontario, Calgary is about 1700 miles west, while Tampa is a mere 1100 miles away. I'm cheering for the "home" team. Go Lightning! And on-topic: Not conclusively a goal...better to let the series play out than award the cup to Calgary based on an iffy camera angle.

posted by rocket88 at 09:58 AM on June 07, 2004

At least no one seems to be complaining about the calibre of the hockey these days. Game 5 and 6 were great games. I don't think that you could award a goal with that being the only camera angle. I sure looked like it was in, but when you think about angles and perspective it may not have been completely over the line. I've always thought there should be a sensor in the puck that would tell you whether it would have crossed the line or not. If they could figure out where the puck was 5 years ago to put a halo around the damn thing you figure the technology would have improved to the point they could figure out if it had crossed the goal line. Who will win tonight? If Kipper is sharp (compared to Sat night) the Flames will win. Even though Iginla and Richards are getting all the press I really think this series has been about the goalies. The Bulin wall is the only reason this series has gone 7. He would get my vote for MVP over Richards if the Bolts win.

posted by camcanuck at 10:36 AM on June 07, 2004

Hmmm.... okay Kipper may have to be REALLY well tonight. Regehr was seen wearing a cast on his left foot. That would be a huge loss for the Flames. My guess is he will play, but he will not be anywhere close to 100%. Donovan's injury is perhaps even worse. His speed will be sorely missed. If the Flames actually win they will have done so missing basically their entire second line, and 2 of their top 4 defenseman for most of the playoffs. I still can't believe how few injuries the Bolts have especially considering the poor ice they play on.

posted by camcanuck at 10:48 AM on June 07, 2004

I would have agreed with you cam up until games 5 and 6 - when the goaltending fluctuated between brillant and ordinary. The Con Symthe is either Richards' or Iginla's now.

posted by WeedyMcSmokey at 01:03 PM on June 07, 2004

Tampa hasn't been able to win back to back games since eliminating Montreal and then beating Philadelphia in game 1 of that series. Anyway, I think Iginla is going to be the difference tonight.

posted by Stan Fields at 01:49 PM on June 07, 2004

Prediction time: 2-1 Flames, game winner by Mr. Invisible in this series, Craig Conroy. Wasn't Gelinas' "goal" kicked in anyway?

posted by Succa at 02:50 PM on June 07, 2004

There was no "distinct kicking motion" on Gelinas' goal/non-goal. He was stopping, and the puck bounced off his skate...

posted by MeatSaber at 03:15 PM on June 07, 2004

TB, Richards gets the only goal of the game, Khabi is MVP.

posted by billsaysthis at 03:53 PM on June 07, 2004

OMG... if Conroy scores the winner they will never got him to stop talking! Seriously.. it would be great for a guy who for most the year toils in relative obscurity compared to his linemate Iginla to get his day in the sun. No matter which way it goes I think this game is going to be close. When was the last time a game 7 went to overtime? Has it ever happened?

posted by camcanuck at 04:19 PM on June 07, 2004

Twice. The last was 1954 - Detroit over Montreal. The other was 1950 - Detroit over NY Rangers in double OT.

posted by rocket88 at 05:07 PM on June 07, 2004

Here's some game 7 stats.

posted by rocket88 at 05:09 PM on June 07, 2004

TB, Richards gets the only goal of the game, Khabi is MVP. If Richards were to get the only goal (which, at the time of this post, isn't going to happen as Fedotenko has already scored (assist by Richards!)), then he'd win the MVP easily. 8 game winning goals in the playoffs + leading the league in playoff points = unanimous decision for MVP. That said, if Calgary wins, it's going to go to Iginla.

posted by grum@work at 08:09 PM on June 07, 2004

2-0 with <15 minutes to go, Khabi looks to get the MVP especially if he keeps the clean sheet.

posted by billsaysthis at 09:22 PM on June 07, 2004

damn you bill. the second after i read your comment the flames scored.

posted by goddam at 09:29 PM on June 07, 2004

goddam, I am the grape in the God's wine.

posted by billsaysthis at 09:52 PM on June 08, 2004

You're not logged in. Please log in or register.