No conspiracy theory here.  Just blatant incompetence. 

Greg can *#$%@& off, plain and simple.  His bias was clear cut way before tonight.

Posted by stayouttamalibu from Temporarily in Tempe, AZ on 11/19/09 at 03:54 AM ET

Thank you Chief. Well said.

Posted by Bean on 11/19/09 at 04:03 AM ET

What a f*cking tool Wyshynski is.  I don’t think any of us are in the mood for his particular brand of pompous, self-satisfied smugness that thinks it’s funny.

Posted by AndrewFromAnnArbor from Fortress Europe on 11/19/09 at 04:13 AM ET

Smartest Oiler fans on the internet agree.

From Lowetide’s game thread:

PDO said…
Bruce:

Just be happy you’re not a Wings fan right now (how often do you get to say that?).

Brad May shoots the puck into the net. Cleanly in. But it’s tucked inside the net… but there’s zero dispute it went in from the shot and was smothered against the inside corner of the net by Auld.

Ref blows the whistle about five seconds after the puck has been in the net. Waves no goal.

They go upstairs.

Waived off.

Why?

The ref “intended” to blow his whistle.

When?

Who knows, because the puck was on the stick one second, in the net the next…

8:34 PM, November 18, 2009

And the response a bit later in the comments:

Bruce said…
Wow, just saw that call against Detroit. Absolutely brutal. *#$%@&’ near criminal that they couldn’t get it right upon review.

9:41 PM, November 18, 2009

I trust those folks opinion a lot more than those of many others.  One of my favorite blogs just because of the incredible intelligence and wit of the comments.

Posted by Baroque from Michigan on 11/19/09 at 04:16 AM ET

Puckdaddy has a point though.  He said the call was bad, but there’s no question that wings cry about the refs all the time especially in the playoffs.  I don’t know how many times I heard wings fans say bettman wanted crosby to win the cup.  They’re as bad as calgary fans who think the refs are against them every single night.  Go read calgarypuck during any loss and it’s always the refs fault that they lost.

So before you try to discredit puckdaddy, you should acknowledge that his last paragraph was 100% the truth.

Posted by Tinfoil hat on 11/19/09 at 04:56 AM ET

Whoa, PuckDaddy seems to be tin foiled against A2Y.

From the post very posted he was referring to:

It’s no conspiracy. It’s reality and we all just accept it.  We, all hockey fans, just bend over and accept it.  We accept the worst officiating in sports. We accept a crooked, incompetent commissioner.  We just take it because we love hockey and we love our teams.

Learn to read, Wysdouchski

Posted by Guilherme from Brasil on 11/19/09 at 04:58 AM ET

This quality of officiating in this league is going downhill faster than the speed of SUCK.

Posted by dougie on 11/19/09 at 06:35 AM ET

I’m sorry that you are giving Wysh any traffic for his lousy writing.  Sadly, he will get the loudest word in the matter because he has the bigger stage.  That is the gift he got for being a sell out hack who writes for the undiscriminite hockey fan.  My third nipple has more originality than him.

Posted by yreland from Van Dieman's Land on 11/19/09 at 07:02 AM ET

I don’t know how many times I heard wings fans say bettman wanted crosby to win the cup.

Of COURSE he wanted the annointed “face of the league” to win the Cup - it’s just good marketing, the same way that David Stern once said that his ideal NBA Finals would be between the Lakers and the Lakers, the same way the New York Yankees in the World Series is a good marketing device.

It doesn’t mean that there is any conspiracy to have it happen (except basketball - everyone knows that is fixed), just that the sports leagues are bright enough to recognize when the ideal marketing opportunity falls into their laps and they are prepared to ham-handedly mismanage it.

Anyone who doesn’t think that the league as an entity WANTED Crosby to win the Cup is just an idiot.  It doesn’t mean that anyone fixed anything that way.

The officiating is just flat-out abysmal and has been for years, and in a league that constantly harps about how great the fans are, and how technologically savvy the fans are, to have officiating that is to what it could be as a string and two paper cups is to a smart phone is inexcusable.

It’s 2009, NHL - use some of the technological tools available to improve the officiating, and anyone who can’t handle it, take their crayons away and force them to.

Posted by Baroque from Michigan on 11/19/09 at 07:26 AM ET

In my 21 years of watching sports, there’s at least one thing I’ve learned: it’s never a good thing when you memorize referee’s names.

Brad Watson, Dan O’Halloran, Dennis LaRue, Ed Hochuli, Tim Donaghy, McLelland (MLB), some soccer ones you guys never heard of…

It’s a dark time for refereeing, every sport, everywhere.

(For example, any other soccer fan saw Henry handling the ball in the WC qualifiers? Ridiculous)

Posted by Guilherme from Brasil on 11/19/09 at 07:41 AM ET

(For example, any other soccer fan saw Henry handling the ball in the WC qualifiers? Ridiculous)

Posted by Guilherme from Brasil on 11/19/09 at 07:41 AM ET

yes,I did,it will be difficult to cheer for Barcelona now,hope Guardiola starts bencing him and force him to go elsewhere

Posted by Edillac from jesenice,europe on 11/19/09 at 08:02 AM ET

Puckdaddy has a point though.  He said the call was bad, but there’s no question that wings cry about the refs all the time especially in the playoffs.
Posted by Tinfoil hat on 11/19/09 at 04:56 AM ET

You obviously have no frame of reference here, you’re like a kid who wanders in in the middle of a movie and…

Watch the goal that Hossa scores in Game 3 of the Western Conference Semi-Final…watch when the puck goes over the line and listen for when the whistle blows.

Do the same thing with Brad May’s goal from last night.

Now try and tell us that we don’t have a right to complain about officiating.

Seriously…go ahead I’ll be waiting right here.  In that time you might want to also consider thinking of a more clever username if you’re going to try and make fun of us.  Put some effort into it.

Posted by Animal Drew from A Nightmare on Helm Street on 11/19/09 at 08:06 AM ET

I don’t know why that was all italicized.

Posted by Animal Drew from A Nightmare on Helm Street on 11/19/09 at 08:06 AM ET

i stopped reading puck daddy back in the finals. the last straw came with his stupid conn smythe watch where, after posting a shutout in game 5, osgood got moved down a rank and, after getting pulled in the second period, fleury moved up one. haha, what a joke.

Posted by Twig on 11/19/09 at 08:08 AM ET

Prior to his last-minute, kick to the nuts of a statement at the end, which was unnecessary, uncalled for and a clear hint at bias?

I for one enjoy reading blogs that toss out unnecessary, uncalled jabs at other teams and/or bloggers. I also enjoy reading blogs with a clear bias.

If it weren’t for unnecessary, uncalled for statements and a clear pro-Wings bias, I’m not sure that A2Y would have any content, and as a reader since the pre-empire days, I wouldn’t have it any other way.

Terrible, indefensible call. But hey, glass houses and all that stuff.

-B

Posted by brennan on 11/19/09 at 08:29 AM ET

So before you try to discredit puckdaddy, you should acknowledge that his last paragraph was 100% the truth.

His last paragraph was the truth—about Red Wings fans, about Pens fans, Islanders fans, Habs fans, Leafs fans, Oilers fans, etc. etc. etc….

Do you see the pattern?

His last paragraph was the truth ABOUT ALL FANS. FAN is short for FANATIC. We are FANATICAL about our teams. We notice every bad call that goes against our team, and of course have no trouble forgetting vice versa. It’s the nature of sports fandom. Get off your high-horse.

Posted by Nathan from the scoresheet! on 11/19/09 at 08:32 AM ET

I haven’t been to Puck Daddy since Wyshinski himself came here to defend Two Line Pass and called me a troll on my home blog after I said his site was the ESPN of hockey blogs, catering to the lowest common denominator.

I won’t give that site traffic.  Wyshinksi has proven time and again that he’ll say (or allow his fellow writers to say) the dumbest and most inflammatory shit possible in order to drum up interest in his site because they’re all basically incapable of doing a good job about it themselves.  Puck Daddy is a victim of its own size and readership.  Since it’s one of the biggest hockey blogs, the mass of stupidity that it most of the commenters there leave them unable to write real quality stuff, instead they just slaughter things for the enjoyment of the coliseum there.  Whatever journalistic integrity Wysh once had has long since gone and he’s Nero, happily fiddling away while setting fires wherever he can.

I’d be a lot happier with Puck Daddy if James Mirtle ran the place.

Posted by J.J. from Kansas on 11/19/09 at 08:37 AM ET

Chief et al:

When I read this:

“Oh. That’s right.  It’s just another Wing fan and a conspiracy theory, right?  Ok.  Go with that if you want, but I’d suggest you watch this joke real close before stepping out on that branch.

It’s no conspiracy. It’s reality and we all just accept it. We, all hockey fans, just bend over and accept it.  We accept the worst officiating in sports. We accept a crooked, incompetent commissioner.  We just take it because we love hockey and we love our teams.”

... I read it as “there’s no conspiracy, we just accept it as fact that the commissioner is crooked.”

And yes, based on the ramblings here in the past about the All-Star Game quasi-suspensions and disrespecting the Wing and coddling Sidney Crosby, logic would dictate that calling the commissioner “Crooked” would mean he’s favoring one side over another; in this case, it would be the team playing the Red Wings.

And I’m sure it doesn’t say anything about that perception of Detroit fans as Wing-Nuts when you headline a post “Choosing Sides” and then choose to quote the only paragraph that doesn’t absolutely blast the NHL for stealing a goal from the Wings. I chose my side: The NHL screwed Detroit, again. But I guess the last graph will get more clicks here than the first six.

I’m also sure it doesn’t say anything about that perception when one of this blog’s immediate reaction to last night’s mess was an Ann Coulter-ish search for bias from opinion writers. Carry on.

Posted by Greg Wyshynski from Washington, DC on 11/19/09 at 09:03 AM ET

And I’m sure it doesn’t say anything about that perception of Detroit fans as Wing-Nuts when you headline a post “Choosing Sides” and then choose to quote the only paragraph that doesn’t absolutely blast the NHL for stealing a goal from the Wings. I chose my side: The NHL screwed Detroit, again. But I guess the last graph will get more clicks here than the first six.

It says that you, as the editor of Puck Daddy and the writer of that article are willing to take what would be a well-written piece (I assume, since I’m not visiting your site), and would add a paragraph intended solely to inflame readers.  You’re proving my point that your bullshit sensationalist tendencies discredits what could be among the best hockey blogs on the internet.  You said that the worst thing about the entire situation is that it gets fans like us angry.  Really?  that’s the worst thing about the NHL allowing a referee to completely blow a call, that on a corner of the internet that you can happily avoid, a bunch of fans are going to be mad about it?

Posted by J.J. from Kansas on 11/19/09 at 09:17 AM ET

Carry on.

I plan to.  And, unlike you, I have no intention of hiding behind some bullshit cloak of objectivity.  Your site is biased and the great majority of your readers are total idiots.  You’ve found a niche with them and catered to them. 

I have no use for Puck Daddy. None.  But I’ll tell you this, I have no intention of letting this garbage drop.  You piled on with your “tin foil hat” crap at a time when it was unnecessary and uncalled for.

I don’t care about your first six paragraphs Greg.  And I’m sure you’re concerned with “clicks”. I’m not.  The last paragraph says everything any of us need to know about your blog.  Defend it if you want.  But your biases are clear, and I was the last one to see it.

Posted by IwoCPO from Sunny San Diego, bitches on 11/19/09 at 09:23 AM ET

Wyshynski,
We are not the only fans that can’t stand Bettman. We are not the only team that has been screwed over by officiating. We are not the only fans that see Sydney Crosby as a crying little boy propped up by Gary Bettman and the league he runs. I promise you this.
Maybe us complaining more means we have more to complain about. Maybe it means we’re just whiny. Or maybe, just maybe, it means that you, and others like you, look for every opportunity to claim that Wings fans are “once again” crying conspiracy. You look so hard that you can take an instance, like this, where a fan and blogger is blatantly saying it’s not a conspiracy, and twist it in your mind to where he must be saying that it really is a conspiracy.
And Greg, one last thing. When are you gonna learn to stay the heck away when you piss of the 19?

Posted by MrsOtW from Wyoming, Mi on 11/19/09 at 09:28 AM ET

Greg, personally my issue with you in this case isn’t that you took a shot at Wings fans. I really don’t care much either way about your perceived objectivity.

My problem is that by making light of this you have in a sense, maybe unintentionally, done your part to somewhat legitimize what is likely the worst no goal call since the inception of video replay.

It’s that typical semi-fake outrage you get from the national media where, instead of having the stones to actually take the refs and the league to task in a serious way, the complaints are couched in this “ah well, the officiating is just one big joke anyway” attitude.

It’s one of thes reasons why the NHL will continue to have the worst officiating in any major sport. Because the ineptitude is accepted as a genetic part of the game, moreso than in any other sport.

If any member of the national hockey media had any balls whatsoever, they would be calling for LaRue to be suspended right now. What happened last night was the clearest case of an official thinking he’s “bigger than the game” that I’ve ever seen in my life. His ego got hurt, so he decided to throw a tantrum.

The sad thing is that a week from now, this will all be forgotten. And then another hideously blown call will happen and the hockey media will laugh it off again. Repeat ad infinitum.

Posted by Mandingo from The Garage on 11/19/09 at 09:35 AM ET

No one here would ever pile-on with inflammatory comments at a time that it was unnecessary and uncalled for.

Instead, I’ll say this:  the Ducks can suck it.

And they can suck it all summer.

Granola bitch Niedermayer can retire. Selanne can go home to Finland and exchange international text messages with B. Lang about high fashion.

And the punk ass bitch Corey Perry can go straight to hell for all I care while Chris Pronger goes back to YEStyping with his elbows on his wannabe blog.

It’s been seven years since I felt so satisfied after a Wing series win.  Not seven years this June.  Seven years to the day Patrick Roy got laughed off the ice at the Joe.  And I can’t tell you how happy I am that the winning goal was “controversial.”

Really Randy? You take issue with that? Interference you say?  Oh.  Well enjoy your summer bitch.

Man up and take your jabs. God knows you can you dish ‘em out.

I love reading your over-the-top comments, but this over-sensitive whiny crap doesn’t become you.

Posted by brennan on 11/19/09 at 09:41 AM ET

Man up and take your jabs. God knows you can you dish ‘em out.

I love reading your over-the-top comments, but this over-sensitive whiny crap doesn’t become you.

Posted by brennan on 11/19/09 at 09:41 AM ET

We can take them when they’re not hidden behind a BS claim of objectivity.

Haven’t seen you comment here in a while Brennan.  Interesting choice of days to get back on the horse. 

And spare me your holier than thou “doesn’t become you” shit.  If you don’t like it, leave.

Posted by IwoCPO from Sunny San Diego, bitches on 11/19/09 at 09:46 AM ET

And people wonder why blogs struggle for credibility.

Wysh is an example of the best and worst of blogging.  Sadly, right now he’s leaning pretty hard on the latter.

Posted by HockeyinHD on 11/19/09 at 09:59 AM ET

Well, Mission Accomplished for Wyshynski.  I’m sure he’s counting the extra hits today, and the extra pennies that’ll hit his pockets from making inflammatory remarks behind a guise of objectivity.  Just Greg?  When you’ve finally saved enough dough to buy that night with a fifty-dollar whore you’ve always wanted, don’t bother yourself with the thought that maybe you got the money by being a disingenious ass who lacks any shred of integrity.  Conscience wouldn’t suit you, honey.  Ever thought about a career in politics?  And hey, I’m sure Bettman could use another yes-man.

(For example, any other soccer fan saw Henry handling the ball in the WC qualifiers? Ridiculous)

Posted it in the last thread, Guilherme.  At least the May no-goal wasn’t the only badly blown call last night.

Posted by AndrewFromAnnArbor from Fortress Europe on 11/19/09 at 10:04 AM ET

If I were Uncle Mike I would get a still of the “no goal” blow it up nice and big and conduct all press confrences in front of it. Then I would tell Gary to suck a deep fried cock. But that’s just me…

Posted by rock & rye from Cartersville, Ga on 11/19/09 at 10:19 AM ET

Yeah, probably should have just kept my mouth shut.

Too little sleep wondering what could have possibly warranted Intent To Whistle.

I’ve never really considered PD to be a straight news source bound to a standard of objectivity. I’d always thought of it as just another blog, editorializing and all. If Wyshynski is trying to run a blog that is purely reporting, than yeah, he was out of line editorializing like that. I just never got that impression, but I’m not saying that he hasn’t claimed that (I don’t know one way or the other).

I wasn’t trying to be holier-than-thou, just expressing an opinion. I absolutely love it when you’re pissed off and throwing around over the top insults - not so much when you’re pissed off and sulking.

I’ll go back to enjoying the mud-slinging quietly now. Keep up the good work.

Posted by brennan on 11/19/09 at 10:22 AM ET

Take off the skirt…..take a step back…..and notice the amount of whining coming from this group.

Muppets.

Posted by Denis Maruk on 11/19/09 at 10:32 AM ET

Your site is biased and the great majority of your readers are total idiots.  You’ve found a niche with them and catered to them. 

So you’re saying, once again, that I’ve written something I don’t believe in order to cater to my audience.

Do you own a mirror, sir?

I have no use for Puck Daddy. None.  But I’ll tell you this, I have no intention of letting this garbage drop.  You piled on with your “tin foil hat” crap at a time when it was unnecessary and uncalled for.

Again, fake radio war nonsense. Don’t reach out for advice from me on email and then trash my site in public. You didn’t soap box it when we named the Wings the team of the decade or stepped up to the plate on the long-term contracts. Your problem is that you can’t separate a comment made about Wings fans from our coverage of the Wings. To wit:

I don’t care about your first six paragraphs Greg.  And I’m sure you’re concerned with “clicks”. I’m not.  The last paragraph says everything any of us need to know about your blog.  Defend it if you want.  But your biases are clear, and I was the last one to see it.

What’s my bias? That I think this blog and its faux indignation have painted Wings fans as insecure conspiracy theorists, and that the same vibe is felt from many of the Wings fans who post n Puck Daddy?  That you did exactly what your readers accuse me of doing, which is sullying a legit argument with a “let’s see where the MSM comes down on this one!”/“us vs. the world” act?

Am I unfair to the Wings fans who are hypersensitive to criticism and bash the NHL for being “crooked?” Yes. Am I unfair to the Detroit Red Wings? No. But your inability to separate the two helps fuel this “bullshit cloak of objectivity” stupidity.

Posted by Greg Wyshynski from Washington, DC on 11/19/09 at 10:34 AM ET

I can’t see why Wysh had to say that. No one argued conspiracy (we did the exact opposite), no one even mentioned him. And damn, he’s on Yahoo.

It feels like a college guy bullying a kindergarden boy. You know, if kindergarden was waaay cooler than college.

Posted by Guilherme from Brazsil on 11/19/09 at 10:36 AM ET

Am I unfair to the Wings fans who are hypersensitive to criticism and bash the NHL for being “crooked?” Yes.

Ah, there’s those standards I’m so used to from journalists.  Ethics and integrity, my ass.

I guess that impartiality and responsibilty were buried with Edward R. Murrow.  If anyone wants me, I’ll be on the phone trying to get a hold of Pete Hamill.

Posted by AndrewFromAnnArbor from Fortress Europe on 11/19/09 at 10:48 AM ET

Greg, your problem isn’t your bias. We’re all biased. You’re taking offense over something trivial and arguing the wrong thing becuase it’s an easier target and more emotionally satisfying.

Your problem is that, like I said above, you are (probably unintentionally) legitimizing an absolutely unconscionable call by mischaracterizing the outrage.

To wit: You linked to a blog post as an example of tin foil hat nuttery that contained nothing of the sort. I’m not personally insulted by it, but make no mistake about it, it was obviously intended as an insult. And now everyone is pissed off and throwing sh*t.

And what aren’t we talking about anymore? That’s right: the call.

Posted by Mandingo from The Garage on 11/19/09 at 10:50 AM ET

I said no one mentioned Puck Daddy, I was wrong.

Someone wondered what could you say about that. Wysh, we wanted to know if you were going to be objective, forget the which teams were playing (and their fans) and give a straight opinion about the call.

And you did that, for a whole six paragraphs. Then it came. A gratuitous and deliberate attack to a blog that, in this incident, didn’t spend two lines of text about you. That’s the bad part, at least for me.

Posted by Guilherme from Brazsil on 11/19/09 at 10:57 AM ET

To put a finer point on it, and this is just one man’s observation: Unlike the rest of the sports media, the mainstream hockey media seem to have this proclivity towards bizarre, semi-faux outrage when it comes to blown calls. As if it’s more something to be laughed about than taken seriously. I really don’t get this attitude; you don’t see it in any of the three other major sports, where the officiating is REALLY taken to task by their respective media. Look no further than the coverage of the umpiring in this year’s MLB playoffs.

Mischaracterizing the outrage over this seems to fall in line with this seemingly hockey-media-wide tendency to not take poor officiating as seriously as it should be taken…or, at least, as seriously as it’s taken in other sports. I think it speaks to a certain tribe mentality that exists among the game and those who cover it.

Maybe you’re hamstrung by your bosses at Yahoo or the comedic nature of your blog. I don’t know. I’m willing to give you the benefit of the doubt. But it’s really hard to look at your reaction to this and not think you’re being part of the problem, not part of the solution.

I mean, are we as fans and media really serious about putting an end to this crap? Or are we content with the emotionally satisfying outrage (not to mention page views) that it generates?

Posted by Mandingo from The Garage on 11/19/09 at 11:11 AM ET

Mr. Wyshniski, the question here is: Do you claim to run a non-biased, strictly news-based hockey website?

If the answer is yes, then there is no place for “personal” jabs in your articles, which means no attacking fan bases.  No opinion without disclaimer.  When you stop presenting only facts, you’re venturing into the realm of editorialism, and if you run a hockey news site, that’s unacceptable without some form of notice.  It’s why newspapers have entire sections dedicated to editorials—so thinking people can separate fact from opinion.

If the answer is no, perhaps you need to clarify that to your current and potential readers.  One or the other, opinion or fact.  Can’t really mash the two together and maintain any amount of credibility.

The difference between A2Y and “Puck Daddy” is that Chief never ONCE implied he would be impartial or “fair.”  In fact, it has been stated on numerous occasions that will never be the case.  This is a fan blog, specifically tailored to the Detroit Red Wings, therefore there will always be bias with no pretensions of impartiality or anything resembling the like.

You can not compare your site with this blog.  Apples to oranges.  The end.  Full stop.

Posted by RedMenace from the darkest recesses on 11/19/09 at 11:38 AM ET

... and of course, I misspelled Wyshnyski.  Prrof-reeding fwt.

Posted by RedMenace from the darkest recesses on 11/19/09 at 11:39 AM ET

Mandingo’s absolutely right, Wysh.  You wrote what could have been an absolutely stellar article about the state of officiating in the league, then you shat all over it by implying that it’s too bad because it makes you have to grudgingly agree with nutjob fans who deserve to be marginalized.  Well, if we deserve to be marginalized, then so does the argument that the reffing standard has to change.

Posted by J.J. from Kansas on 11/19/09 at 11:43 AM ET

Well I pretty much laid out a conspiracy, but it was (mostly) tongue-in-cheek.

Sorry to wreck the point, which was a good point.

Posted by Misopogon from Troy, MI on 11/19/09 at 11:56 AM ET

And what aren’t we talking about anymore? That’s right: the call.
Posted by Mandingo from The Garage on 11/19/09 at 10:50 AM ET

QFT.

This whole blog post and every comment in reply to it is about what one person said about what other people were saying about the call.  Twelve hours later and we’ve gone from “What a horrible call.” to “This guy’s an *#$%@&!”

I’ll expand on that over at my place later but the bottom line is that it shouldn’t matter whether Wings fans are conspiracy theorists or any of that.  Even nutjobs are right sometimes and in this case the fact that a horrible, horrible call was made shouldn’t be treated lightly just because of who it was made against.

Posted by DetroitHockey on 11/19/09 at 12:03 PM ET

Wysdouchski is unworthy of anymore commentary period. I stopped visiting his site last year. It holds nothing of value.

I care about the state of the officiating because I freaking LOVE hockey. It makes me sick when the type of officiating that happened last night happens to ANY team. But I particularly care when it happens to the Wings because I’m a die-hard Wings’ fan. Always have, always will. And as someone said last night, it’s not a conspiracy if they’re really out to get you.

And I’m glad that, for all it’s juveniliciousness, I have A2Y to read. I read it specifically because the Chief and the rest of the 19 share the same bias I do. If you don’t like A2Y, no ones forcing you to read it.

Posted by Jennemy of the Skate from putting the b*tches in the box on 11/19/09 at 12:17 PM ET

I don’t think it can be said any better than how Mandingo put it, so I’m just going to quote it and make sure everyone reads it a second time:

Greg, your problem isn’t your bias. We’re all biased. You’re taking offense over something trivial and arguing the wrong thing becuase it’s an easier target and more emotionally satisfying.

Your problem is that, like I said above, you are (probably unintentionally) legitimizing an absolutely unconscionable call by mischaracterizing the outrage.

To wit: You linked to a blog post as an example of tin foil hat nuttery that contained nothing of the sort. I’m not personally insulted by it, but make no mistake about it, it was obviously intended as an insult. And now everyone is pissed off and throwing sh*t.

And what aren’t we talking about anymore? That’s right: the call.

Posted by Mandingo from The Garage on 11/19/09 at 10:50 AM ET

Actually, there is one spot where Mandingo and I disagree. We aren’t upset with Douchinski for disliking the Wings, we’re upset with him for continuing to trash on Red Wings fans.

We are FANS. As fans, we are prone to overreacting to things that are both good and bad for our team. We are also prone to thinking it’s “our team against the world.” Go find a Calgary Flames message board. Or a St. Louis Blues blog. Or a Phoenix Coyotes blog. It’s all the same… because we’re all fans. It’s the nature of the beast.

Posted by Nathan from the scoresheet! on 11/19/09 at 12:20 PM ET

@ Mandingo—

First, thanks for being reasoned on this, because I know we’ve had our dust-ups.

Maybe you’re hamstrung by your bosses at Yahoo or the comedic nature of your blog. I don’t know. I’m willing to give you the benefit of the doubt. But it’s really hard to look at your reaction to this and not think you’re being part of the problem, not part of the solution.

I wish the folks here, Chief included, would knock off the presumptions about my job. I wrote what I wrote at the end of the post because that’s going to be part of the story, at least on blogs like this one. The “crooked” commissioner, Gary’s NHL, yadda yadda—it was a ref who completely blew a call and a rulebook that has “intent to blow” in it. If Abel To Yzerman hadn’t become a cottage industry of “us against the world” chatter, my perceptions of some Wings fans’ reaction (as I wrote: not all) would be different. The comments here haven’t disappointed.

But since that’s the direction the editor took this blog over the years, that’s the expected response. It’s your call: If you think that last part of the post undermined the first six paragraphs, fine. I don’t think it did, and neither did the majority of my readers or my editors.

As for “my job,” I’m an opinion writer who also covers the news. I’m subjective and objective. And again, the issue here is that my comments about Wings fans have zippy, zero, zilch, nada, nothing to do with my comments about or coverage of the team. Bill decided to make the end of my post indicative of “anti-Wings bias” ... I guess because it makes good copy or red meat for the readers here. But one opinion has nothing to do with the other, at all.

Posted by Greg Wyshynski from Washington, DC on 11/19/09 at 12:20 PM ET

Douche - fact that you insist upon so vigorously justifying yourself is kind of pathetic.

The fact is that A2Y is for Wings fans, about Wings fans and by a Wings fan. If we have an “us against the world” attitude, so be it. That’s because this is OUR place to air our grievances, celebrate the victories and share our love for the Wings.

Posted by Jennemy of the Skate from putting the b*tches in the box on 11/19/09 at 12:42 PM ET

Wysh,

I don’t really care if you hold a bias or if there has been a prior claim to explicit objectivity, or anything relating to that.  That hasn’t ever kept me from reading Puck Daddy and it doesn’t cross my mind when I do.  You’re a Devils fan, and I accept that anyone who is not a fan of the Wings probably doesn’t like the Wings.  I’m okay with that.

What bothers me is that your post was great for the first five paragraphs—not so much because I’m a Wings fan and feel that we (possibly) got robbed of one regular season win but because this should be an issue to the League and fans everywhere—and then you cap it off with “the worst part about this is.”  I don’t know if that was solely meant to be tongue-in-cheek, but if you really believe that, then I defer once again to J.J. in his “Really?” comment above.  I’m not going to tell you what your writing should and shouldn’t be about, but I feel that you had a good thing going as far as calling out the league to the best of your ability, and then (whether intentionally or not) blanketed the entire thing by making the Tin Foil Hat comment, which caused more than enough fire at this site to cover up the more important issue.

You pointed to how we ignored the main chunk of your article and jumped right on the last paragraph, but how are we not going to ignore your NHL-bashing when you address us directly, and by leading into it with “the worst thing about this is ....” ?

Posted by Triple Deke Tyler from Lansing on 11/19/09 at 12:46 PM ET

First, thanks for being reasoned on this

Sure.

If you think that last part of the post undermined the first six paragraphs, fine. I don’t think it did, and neither did the majority of my readers or my editors.

I think we’ll just have to agree to disagree on that.

Look, I’m not even saying it was intentional on your part. But I think you (maybe inadvertently) set up a strawman and diverted attention away from the real issue.

Anyway, I’m real interested to see how this all plays out after all the dust clears. It’s hard to imagine that the league wouldn’t issue some kind of explanation or apology, yet at the same time it’s hard to imagine that they would. That’s what sucks about the NHL. And maybe we’re all a little to blame for not directing and focusing our collective outrage at those who really deserve it.

And having had my Kumbaya moment, I’m off to lunch.

Posted by Mandingo from The Garage on 11/19/09 at 12:46 PM ET

But one opinion has nothing to do with the other, at all.

Posted by Greg Wyshynski from Washington, DC on 11/19/09 at 12:20 PM ET

Then why put them both in the same article?  All it does is blur your opinion of the team and the opinion of the fans together to the confusion of any readers.

It’s sloppy writing.

- - - - - - - - - -

And the sad thing about everyone letting this go - and they most definitely are - is that it gets glossed over the same way inappropriate comments from an elderly relative are glossed over.  “Oh, don’t mind Uncle William using derogatory ethnic slurs, that’s just how he was raised” where a younger person would be spoken to about how that language is hurtful and shouldn’t be used.  “Sure, the hockey officials are lousy, but really, what else can you expect from a third-rate sports league?” instead of what other sports do - which is take problems of officiating very seriously because it goes to the heart of the credibility of the league.

All it does is continue that idea that poor hockey isn’t capable of any better than this.

Posted by Cat from Michigan on 11/19/09 at 12:49 PM ET

Wysh, so you think Gary has nothing to do with the call—it was “a bad ref and the rulebook”?

It’s a bad referee in Gary’s league, working with Gary’s league rulebook. Of course he is indirectly faulty.

If the NHL trains its referees, it’s Gary’s fault.

If the NHL pays someone to train its referees, Gary better find someone better to do it.

And if there is not someone better, it’s his job to go out in public, say the officiating is bad, and do something about it.

Posted by Guilherme from Brazsil on 11/19/09 at 12:58 PM ET

Meh, not worried about the Puck Daddy post. I was disappointed with the last paragraph as well, but it pales in comparison to my outrage over the call. Mandingo had it right when he said that we’re somehow now talking about Wysh, rather than the call.

The fact of the matter is that this *#$%@& league needs to figure it’s shit out. It is a joke. Every single call where literally everyone in the whole *#$%@& world can look at it and get it right, but the refs *#$%@& it up undermines the entire sport’s credibility. It’s one thing when it’s just lousy officiating - but this is a pan-*#$%@&-demic.

And can you really blame Wings fans for such a mentality? Honestly, maybe its just because the Wings have played in more important games that most other teams in the league, but it begins to pile on. The Hossa-non goal. Talbot spearing Ozzie in the chest - nothing. Follow that up with Malkin using his stick as a weapon - nothing. Follow that up with an instigator penalty that should result in an automatic suspension - nothing. Penguins run a full cycle with 6 men on the ice - nothing. Aucoin using his stick as a weapon - nothing. Goals with Homer in perfect position - no goal. The hundreds of cross checks to Homer or Cleary in front of opposing nets - no call.

Last night was really just more icing on the cake. I understand every team faces lousy officiating. I’ll never use it as an excuse. Our Wings need to simply overcome. But when things are THAT *#$%@& obvious - and the officials *#$%@& it up - and the League says nothing about it… it’s *#$%@& pathetic.

And when it comes down to it - this is Gary’s league. Period. Just like I’ll lay the blame for PK woes at Uncle Mike’s feet because the buck stops with him, the blame for this pandemic of horrendous officiating needs to be laid at Gary’s. Whether that means he needs to sack up and fire some bitches, or whether that means he simply needs to look at calls like this and put out a blurb on NHL.com saying “we got it wrong, we’re sorry, we’ll correct these mistakes” - SOMETHING needs to be done. This is the most unfriendly league I can think of toward its bread and butter - the fans. From piss poor customer service (anyone ever try to cancel GameCenter between seasons? ugh) to god *#$%@& awful accountability, top to bottom this league treats it’s fans like garbage.

When will we fix this? Who will do it? The scariest part is that this is the very definition of SNAFU—situation is normal. I’m not so sure it’ll ever change. I guess that mean’s I’ll just have to have a coronary well before my time.

Posted by CaptNorris5 from The Winged Wheel, stuck in Chicago on 11/19/09 at 01:14 PM ET

Can’t believe how much hate puckdaddy is getting considering he has the best hockey blog out there.  Yes, this was a terrible call, but no need get so bent out of shape about puckdaddy over it.  Henrik Sedin had a goal waved off against dallas too on a super early whistle and there was no outcry here over that blown call.

Posted by Tinfoil Hat on 11/19/09 at 01:17 PM ET