I really have to laugh when pundits start to complain about Homer.  I will readily agree to have all goals scored by Homer reviewed as long as the refs BEGIN to start handing out penaltys for all the slashing, cross-checking and punches to the face Homer gets EVERY freakin’ game.  You wanna be fair… then lat’s be fair all around.  The truth is that no team knows how to handle Homer.  He is, simply, the best at what he does.  So all you complainers can kiss my taint.

Posted by Mike from La-La Land on 05/09/08 at 03:07 PM ET

Earlier Chief I sent the following to Mr. John just for laughs.

RE: “Time for the Holmstrom rule”

John,

I think your just having flashbacks of 1998 when the Red Wings smoked your Capitals.  And now you’re a Bubba fan to boot.  Don’t tell me your not.  Every sportswriter claims he is not a fan of the team he covers.
Back to my point though.  I watched almost every Wings game this year.  There were at least 3 goals taken away when they called Homer for being in the crease.  Replays clearly showed he wasn’t.  So I welcome the Demolition Man rule.  In more cases then not it will show he was not in the crease, and it will ultimately lead to more “good” Red Wing goals.  Of coarse, none of this really matters because nothing will stop the Big Red Machine!  They are going to win the Stanley Cup again.  You know it, and so does all of Red Wing nation!

Red Wing Jeff
Loveland, CO

Posted by Jeff from Loveland, CO on 05/09/08 at 03:11 PM ET

Hell, the Wings have seen at least 15 goals waived off over the last two seasons, minimum, because Tomas Holmstrom is somewhere below the hash marks and above the goal line, and either a goalie complains, or it’s assumed that the guy fell over or was otherwise unable to stop the puck because Holmstrom was on the ice, period.

Tough ta-tas.  Matt Caples over on the Wings’ website happened to pay attention to what Turco did during Game 1, and the first thing he did was simple:

His battles with the Red Wings’ net-front men started early, and persisted throughout the contest. In his first appearance at the goalmouth, Tomas Holmstrom was welcomed with goalie stick between the legs.  After a scrum out front, Holmstrom chased the puck behind the Dallas net and caught a paddle in front of his skates, sending him down to the ice.

Holmstrom gets the crap kicked out of him every night by goaltenders and defencemen because he’s Tomas Holmstrom, and as soon as he dares to look at a guy cross-eyed, he’s in the penalty box. 

The Stars were furious about Mark Fistric getting called for that 5 on 3 because Steve Ott happened to grab Holmstrom by the throat and punch him in the face--repeatedly--with his glove on.  Maybe they were stunned that somebody actually called anyone for molesting #96, because when Holmstrom’s near the net, everybody’s allowed to cop a feel.

Posted by George James Malik from South Lyon, MI on 05/09/08 at 03:54 PM ET

As a forced reader of his, since he works for the only daily rag in this town, he is far from an expert. Most here would agree that he is less than stellar.

Posted by PredNeck from Hicktown on 05/09/08 at 04:19 PM ET

Glennon is a puppet of the Predaturds front office, he may have been instructed by Poile and Trotz to write that piece, and I guess there’s no surprise that Trotz was on XM 204 today complaining about all the “phantom calls” that the Wings get given to them at home.  I guess he neglected to look at the large number of power plays his team gets at the Trailer Park. I remember a Preds Wings game in Nashville where Legwand slid into the crease after taking a shot, never left, but they allowed Gelinas to put the puck in the net and the goal was allowed. This happened earlier this season, but thats ok if they do it. I will be glad to see this team move.

Posted by Yzerman19 from Nashville on 05/09/08 at 04:23 PM ET

Know what?  If goalie interference were reviewable, I bet Holmstrom would get as many disallowed goals re-allowed by review as allowed goals disallowed by review.

Posted by Ryan from Toronto on 05/09/08 at 04:27 PM ET

Yzerman19, come on. Can’t wait for the Preds to move? That’s a little harsh, even for a Wings fan. You don’t have to stay here.

Posted by PredNeck from Hicktown on 05/09/08 at 04:33 PM ET

Sorry that Nashville has to get stuck with such “journalism.”

Posted by Baroque from Michigan on 05/09/08 at 05:21 PM ET

PredNeck, I moved back here at the beginning of the year, and believe me I can’t wait to find something else and get out.  The Bubbas and the Trailer Park faithful dont deserve a franchise, they only show up after the Vols, Vandy and the Titans seasons are completed and when the Wings come to town.  Was that you who cried on XM 204 about the Sharkies using the whistles like they do for FooFoo ?

Posted by Yzerman19 from Nashville on 05/09/08 at 05:45 PM ET

From Dallas News (via Snapshotss)

The NHL has a very structured grading system in which referees receive daily reports on their performances.

That’s pretty cool. I wonder what they said about Homer’s goal? And getting the wrong guy to make it 5-3?

McReary (sp?) is one of the best out there and I’m not sure it was he who called those. I’m really interested to see how they call the Pens-Flyers game today and, obviously, our tomorrow; that should tell us a bit more about what those reports said.

Posted by Osrt on 05/09/08 at 05:50 PM ET

And the Dallas reporter says exactly what I said at the end. Congratulate me people, I’m becoming MSM!

That would explain the two fang marks on my neck.

Posted by Osrt on 05/09/08 at 05:52 PM ET

why do people all of a sudden believe that you can’t be in the crease when the puck goes in?  how did everyone forget the post-lockout rule changes?

Interference on the Goalkeeper - This rule is based on the premise that an attacking player’s position, whether inside or outside the
crease, should not, by itself, determine whether a goal should be allowed or disallowed. In other words, goals scored while attacking players are standing in the crease may, in appropriate circumstances be allowed. Goals should be disallowed only if: (1) an attacking player, either by his positioning or by contact, impairs the goalkeeper’s ability to move freely within his crease or defend his goal; or (2) an attacking player initiates intentional or deliberate contact with a goalkeeper, inside or outside of his goal crease. Incidental contact with a goalkeeper will be permitted, and resulting goals allowed, when such contact is initiated outside of the goal crease, provided the attacking player has made a reasonable effort to avoid such contact.
The rule will be enforced exclusively in accordance with the on-ice judgement of the Referee(s), and not by means of video replay or
review.

For purposes of this rule, “contact,” whether incidental or otherwise, shall mean any contact that is made between or among a goalkeeper and attacking player(s), whether by means of a stick or any part of the body.

The overriding rationale of this rule is that a goalkeeper should have the ability to move freely within his goal crease without being hindered by the actions of an attacking player. If an attacking player enters the goal crease and, by his actions, impairs the goalkeeper’s ability to defend his goal, and a goal is scored, the goal will be disallowed.

Posted by PaulinMiamiBeach on 05/09/08 at 06:17 PM ET

@ PaulMiami you magnificent Ba8tard that is the just unfair to inject the written law to counter emotional, jealousy-driven hysteria by the Wings-Haters.  Out F’ing Standing.

@ Yzerman19 - Predaturds?  2 2 Funny!

Posted by RWBill from jabbing a six inch sewing needle into my eye. on 05/09/08 at 07:45 PM ET

If an attacking player enters the goal crease and, by his actions, impairs the goalkeeper’s ability to defend his goal, and a goal is scored, the goal will be disallowed.

Standing directly in front of a goalie, preventing him from coming out to cut the angles off very much does impair the goalie’s ability to defend the goal.  That’s exactly why people do it.  It’s allowed outside the crease, but not inside.

I thought it was a legal goal because Holmstrom didn’t touch Turco (in any significant way, at least), until they read that rule on TSN.  It wouldn’t have, and doesn’t, matter, but the goal should have been called back.

Of course, Turco never should have backed up to let Holmstrom in, either.  If he’d just stood his ground, it would have been an easy, clear-cut call with no dispute from either side.  Not all the blame lies with the refs.

Posted by Ryan from Toronto on 05/09/08 at 09:13 PM ET

it’s sure great there are still things to read about from the last two rounds, because there isn’t much to read about in the Dallas media.  man this is going to be a boring series.  at least it’s going to be short

Posted by PaulinMiamiBeach on 05/09/08 at 09:59 PM ET

Of course, Turco never should have backed up to let Holmstrom in, either.  If he’d just stood his ground, it would have been an easy, clear-cut call with no dispute from either side.

Agreed.  But the fact that Turco never moved out, never made contact with Holmstrom, is the reason why the call was the correct one, IMO.  Holmstrom never impeded Turco’s ability to move in his crease… not in the direction Turco chose to move.

Either way, it will be interesting to see what happens tonight.  I hope Turco chooses to move way back in his crease all game long.

Posted by BobTheZee on 05/10/08 at 10:02 AM ET