Yes, and Brad Stuart probably should have been suspended for his hit on Teemu Selanne, too.  If Ron MacLean got his way every day…

Posted by George James Malik from South Lyon, MI on 05/15/09 at 10:19 AM ET

What bothers me most about these guys is how sad they sound that Detroit got this goal. They don’t mention all the breaks the Ducks had and all the bad calls throughout the series. And they don’t convince me that it was a bad goal.

Posted by Sp4r7an on 05/15/09 at 10:23 AM ET

I think it was questionable… you are not supposed to be able to score by pushing the goalie into the net… however, in this case the puck was not covered and the ANA D was all over Cleary.  The puck was definitely not going into the net under its own steam, so the Cleary push was the deciding factor in crossing the line.  Personally I don’t think it should count, but I can understand why it was.

Makes for a better conference final round anyway, two original 6 teams going head to head… I like it, plus no late starts!

Posted by WingMan from Qc on 05/15/09 at 10:25 AM ET

I think after all these years I’ve finally figured out the deal with Ron McLean: He doesn’t like goals. Any goals. Watching players score goals seems to really bother him for some reason.

I love how you can also hear the disappointment in he and Cherry’s voices. They can only take solace in the fact that the GWG was scored by a Newfoundlander.

They’re both small, sad men.

Posted by Mandingo from The Garage on 05/15/09 at 10:31 AM ET

There was a big difference between Stuart’s hit and Brown’s hit—Stuart hit a guy who was FACING him, and he hit him square in the chest. Brown hit a guy with his head turned toward the play, came in from the side away from the play, and while yes, it was a clean shoulder and not an elbow, it was still a hit to the head.

As for the Cleary goal… what’s the saying? Turnabout is fair play? It was the wrong call in game three to disallow Hossa’s goal. It was the wrong call in game three to allow the goal the Ducks won on because Osgood had Niedermayer in his lap. It was the wrong call in game seven to give the Ducks the power play they scored on because Hudler was pushed into Hiller—what’s more, it should’ve been a Wings power play because Huder was cross-checked into Hiller. It was the wrong call to let Pronger hog-tie and elbow Hossa in one sweeping motion behind his own net. It was the wrong call every single time the refs let the Ducks punch and cross-check the Wings in front of Hiller after the whistles in games two, three, six, and seven (in particular).

Hell, the only right call it seems like they made in this series was the penalty to Brown for the hit on Hudler, including NOT suspending him.

Posted by Nathan from Jonny Ericsson's ice cream truck on 05/15/09 at 10:36 AM ET

Any time Ron MacLean and Don Cherry are saddened by something, an angel gets its wings.

Posted by Primis on 05/15/09 at 10:41 AM ET

Umm, does anyone remember the Wings getting a legit goal called back around game 3 or so? What goes around comes around....

Posted by rwingscup19 from Dallas on 05/15/09 at 10:48 AM ET

Any time Ron MacLean and Don Cherry are saddened by something, an angel gets its wings.

A Canadian angel.

Posted by Nathan from Jonny Ericsson's ice cream truck on 05/15/09 at 10:52 AM ET

This is just downright poor analysis.  I never watch the show because we don’t get Canadian TV in Maryland, and I try to avoid the Cherry schtick as much as possible online, so perhaps I’m naive to expect anything.  But, really, they didn’t bring anything worthwhile at all to this.

This feels exactly like a cable news network trying to promote its candidate for president, pretending to be fair while only playing into their bias.

Posted by BuzzFledderjohn on 05/15/09 at 10:58 AM ET

Wow, you guys are nuts.  MacLean is about as objective as possible.  The Xenophobe to his left might be upset about it, deep down, but it’s not blatant.  If anything, Detroit winning is good news for the CBC.

If you want to bash them, call them on hypocrisy for not repeatedly replaying the bogus call on Hudler which led to the Ducks’ 2nd goal on the PP.  That goal should be just as controversial.

Posted by Jeff J from Ivory Tower on 05/15/09 at 11:11 AM ET

Seriously.....if a goalie can be pushed THAT hard by the blade of a stick (not a cross check, not a skater’s hand or leg, but the blade of a stick controlled by one hand), then the goalie must not be all that serious about stopping the puck.

Posted by creasemonkey from San Diego, CA on 05/15/09 at 11:33 AM ET

You know what?

F you, MacLean.
F you, Cherry.
F you, CBC.
F you, ‘Company Man Dan’ O’Halloran.
F you, Brad Watson.
F you, Corey Perry.
F you, Chris Pronger.
F you, Randy Carlysle.

And a big caps lock key-approved FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF you to Gary Bettman.

The Wings won Gary, you towering jackass, and they are going to beat the crap out of the Hawks.  Oh, and do you know what they are going to do next?  They are going to take your oh-so-disgustingly-beloved Pittsburgh Crosby’s out behind the woodshed.

Again.

So, you can just eat my Winged Wheel shorts, Bettman.  You and all of the brain-dead shill-monkeys the NHL gets in positions to commentate on the league as though they have a frigging ounce of expertise and ought to be taken more seriously than I would take a Chris Pronger dissertation on molecular dynamics.

Detroit’s going to win the Cup again, and you get to hand it over to Lidstrom like you handed over your credibility 10 years ago.

Posted by HockeyinHD on 05/15/09 at 11:43 AM ET

What’s interesting is that Bob McKenzie quotes a different part of the rule that McLean quotes, and it points to the goal being good.  The part that McKenzie quotes pertains specifically to a loose puck battle, which this definitely was.  McLean’s rule seems to be specific to “contact”, which I read as the type of thing that Holmstrom would be called for.

Posted by Garth on 05/15/09 at 11:48 AM ET

I’m still not convinced the cleary goal isn’t a good goal:

.  Further, refer to rule 69.6: Rebounds and Loose Pucks.

In a rebound situation, or where goalkeeper and attacking player(s) are simultaneously attempting to play a loose puck, whether inside or outside the crease, incidental contact with the goalkeeper will be permitted and any goal that is scored as a result thereof will be allowed.

In the event that a goalkeeper has been pushed into the net together with the puck by an attacking player after making a stop, the goal will be disallowed.  If applicable, appropriate penalties will be assessed.  If, however, in the opinion of the referee, the attacking player was pushed or otherwise fouled b y a defender causing the goalkeeper to be pushed into the net together with the puck, the goal can be permitted.

In the event that the puck is under a player in or around the crease area (deliberately or otherwise), a goal cannot be scored by pushing this player together with the puck into the goal.  If applicable, the appropriate penalties will be assessed including a penalty shot if deemed to be covered in the crease deliberately (see rule 63- Delaying the Game).

Posted by shanetx on 05/15/09 at 11:49 AM ET

They are going to take your oh-so-disgustingly-beloved Pittsburgh Crosby’s out behind the woodshed.

They would, except that the Pens won’t beat the Hurricanes.

Posted by Garth on 05/15/09 at 11:49 AM ET

I never take a man seriously if he’s wearing a floral border print that was meant to be used making a skirt. 

Posted by Baroque from Michigan on 05/15/09 at 11:50 AM ET

I should have italicized but I just copied and pasted that from something I sent earlier today.  Everything from “rule 69.6: Rebounds and Loose Pucks” to the end is a direct quotation from the NHL Rulebook.

Posted by shanetx on 05/15/09 at 11:50 AM ET

Don’t forget the puck was basically under Teemu’s feet when he got run through as well. Was Teemu trying to admire a pass that wound up being wrung back alond the boards and through his feet?
I’d wager Stu was going to finish that check whether the puck made it’s way out of the zone or not and we all know it didn’t.  Don’t care, a little Rubber Duckie gets crushed and turn about is fair play in many ways.
I also have some disdain for a guy who stays on the ice for a long time, never misses a shift and seems to be juuuuust fine the next time the puck is on their tape.

Posted by MOWingsfan19 on 05/15/09 at 11:50 AM ET

They’re disappointed the game wasn’t going to overtime, not disappointed the Wings won.  Cherry even said the Wings deserved to win.

I loved the mention of Central arena in Burlington.  That’s the city I grew up in and I played all my minor hockey there.  I never had Ron MacLean as a ref, unfortunately.

Posted by Ryan from Toronto on 05/15/09 at 11:53 AM ET

The puck never stopped moving.  The puck was never covered by Hiller’s pad.  Hiller was not pushed into the goal.  End of story.

Posted by Jeff in CO on 05/15/09 at 11:54 AM ET

I’d wager Stu was going to finish that check whether the puck made it’s way out of the zone or not and we all know it didn’t.  Don’t care, a little Rubber Duckie gets crushed and turn about is fair play in many ways.

My wife and I disagreed about whether this should even have been called.  Initially I didn’t think so at all.  It was a hard, hard hit and it knocked the breath out of Selanne but I don’t think it was far over the line.  She hates Finns with a passion,(with the only two exceptions having (a.) the initials V.F. or (b.) being a little girl she met in the Mediterranean 25 years ago and played with for a week straight despite not knowing anything in each other’s language except how to count to ten) but still thought it was a bit too hard a check into the boards.

I called her a soft European and went on.  What gets me about the hit and ensuing penalty isn’t that it was called until after he made a show of laying there on the ice.  I’m sure it knocked his breath out, and that sucks, but get the heck up and skate off the ice.

Posted by shanetx on 05/15/09 at 12:02 PM ET

Detroit gets some of the wimpiest calls in favor for them. come on, that Teemu Selanne penalty was a goddamn joke.

any surprise the Western teams with massive PP’s in the playoffs have made it to the conference finals?

this game is getting more ridiculous than the NBA. freethrows and power plays should be

hawks, Disney Crosby and the Crash Economy Wings all have absurd amounts of PP opportunities. “Whoever draws the most penalties wins. its kind of like the NBA. most freethrows USUALLY wins.”

boring. this is the playoffs, not pussy hockey.

Posted by Death Metal Nightmare from MKE on 05/15/09 at 12:11 PM ET

Other than fighting with his gloves on, has Datsyuk shown up yet?

Just wondering because I thought people said he was the best in the league.

Not so much?

Posted by Jimmy from Windsor on 05/15/09 at 12:16 PM ET

I find Cherry entertaining. I catch his show on CNN occasionally, where he calls himself Lou Dobbs. Don/Lou is a big proponent of the North American game, which, as practiced by the Ducks, consists largely of interference and cross-checks, like the one Wisniewski was STANDING and giving Holstrom when he got the elbow. The Stuart hit on Selanne was borderline, but, to be fair, Kronwall looks like he’s launching into some of hits off a trampoline.
I don’t think the Cleary goal is even debateable, particularly after seeing the overhead view. It’s divine justice, as well, considering the premature non-whistle in game 3, the Ducks scoring on a power-play after Pronger pushed Hudler into Hiller, and the stick interfering with the play on Niedermeyer’s goal.

Posted by driver on 05/15/09 at 12:20 PM ET

any surprise the Western teams with massive PP’s in the playoffs have made it to the conference finals?

Really?  Because the Ducks scored at least one PP goal in EVERY SINGLE GAME AGAINST THE WINGS, and they’re not in the conference finals…

Other than fighting with his gloves on, has Datsyuk shown up yet?

Yes, he has.  He hasn’t scored, but he played very well for most of the series.  You don’t have to lead the team, series or league in scoring to be the best player on the ice.

Posted by Garth on 05/15/09 at 12:22 PM ET

Detroit gets some of the wimpiest calls in favor for them

Did you watch this series at all? No mention of the non-calls and absolute goonery on display.
Many Wings fans have mentioned the ref’ing was bad in many ways, not supporting one side or the other. We’d much prefer consistent calls and or non calls. To let Pronger one arm bar Hossa RIGHT in front of a ref and not call it but call 2 tick-tacky penalties on ANA is steaming pile of turd regardless of jersey affiliation.

Other than fighting with his gloves on, has Datsyuk shown up yet?
Just wondering because I thought people said he was the best in the league.

Again, did you watch this series? Playing well isn’t simply points put up on the scoresheet.

Posted by MOWingsfan19 on 05/15/09 at 12:23 PM ET

go to http://www.tsn.ca and click the ruffled feathers video. they explain it well even get the rule book out.

Posted by ME on 05/15/09 at 12:34 PM ET

No matter how you see it, deciding such a hard fought series on a contentious goal like that is disappointing. Obviously, calls went for and against each team all series and Perry is a bonehead for making that play at the end of the game (was that also a bigoted, small minded comment by Cherry?), this win will always have an asterisk attached to it.

McLean and Cherry are disappointed that the series ended the way it did and probably were cheering for the Ducks because fans of hockey prefer their style of play. Roller-bladers and no-touch hockey fans prefer the Wings’ dipsy doodling…

Posted by blammo from Vancouver, BC on 05/15/09 at 12:45 PM ET

Detroit gets some of the wimpiest calls in favor for them. come on, that Teemu Selanne penalty was a goddamn joke.

any surprise the Western teams with massive PP’s in the playoffs have made it to the conference finals?

this game is getting more ridiculous than the NBA. freethrows and power plays should be

hawks, Disney Crosby and the Crash Economy Wings all have absurd amounts of PP opportunities. “Whoever draws the most penalties wins. its kind of like the NBA. most freethrows USUALLY wins.”

boring. this is the playoffs, not pussy hockey.

Anyone have any idea what the f*ck this guy’s talking about?

Posted by Mandingo from The Garage on 05/15/09 at 01:02 PM ET

“ this win will always have an asterisk attached to it”

Why?

The goal was good.  Definitely a cleaner goal than the one Niedermayer was given 2 years ago for shoving Hasek into the net.  Hiller’s pad doesn’t even start to move until the puck is nearly over the line.

I’m surprised he didn’t just drop like a rock and roll around like he did when 5’2” (on skates) Juri Hudler got shoved into him.

Posted by Jesters_13 on 05/15/09 at 01:07 PM ET

“Other than fighting with his gloves on, has Datsyuk shown up yet?”

Gotta leave your gloves on when Niedermayer won’t take his visor off.

Posted by Jesters_13 on 05/15/09 at 01:09 PM ET

blammo, you are so off base with everything in that last paragraph, you can just go F yourself.

Posted by moore00 from the Ohio State University on 05/15/09 at 01:14 PM ET

These two jokers are crestfallen that the Wings won.  They sure were hoping for those “good Canadian boys” to come out on top.  I love it.

Posted by Incognetis from Exile in Alabama on 05/15/09 at 01:45 PM ET

In the event that a goalkeeper has been pushed into the net together with the puck by an attacking player after making a stop, the goal will be disallowed.

This is what the Ducks wanted called. But the puck was never “stopped” by Hiller. If you look at the video above, beginning at the 1:05 mark, you’ll see that the puck slides under Hiller’s pad as Cleary pokes at it. Cleary’s stick goes under Hiller’s pad and Hiller moves his leg back. Cleary doesn’t “push” Hiller’s pad until the puck has long-since crossed the goal line. And that’s where the part of Rule 69.6 that Shane points to applies:

In a rebound situation, or where goalkeeper and attacking player(s) are simultaneously attempting to play a loose puck, whether inside or outside the crease, incidental contact with the goalkeeper will be permitted and any goal that is scored as a result thereof will be allowed.

If the puck was still laying on the line when Cleary did finally “push” Hiller’s pad, the goal should have been disallowed. But the video shows that the puck crossed the line during a situation where the “goalkeeper and attacking player(s) [we]re simultaneously attempting to play [the] loose puck”. The goal is good. And now both MacLean and the Flucks can just STFU.

Posted by OlderThanChelios from Grand Rapids on 05/15/09 at 01:53 PM ET

McLean and Cherry are disappointed that the series ended the way it did and probably were cheering for the Ducks because fans of hockey prefer their style of play. Roller-bladers and no-touch hockey fans prefer the Wings’ dipsy doodling…

Another one who needs to watch the games of STFU.

Gotta leave your gloves on when Niedermayer won’t take his visor off.
Posted by Jesters_13 on 05/15/09 at 02:09 PM ET

Cheers Jesters.

Posted by MOWingsfan19 on 05/15/09 at 01:53 PM ET

Great win by the Wings*****

Posted by blammo from Vancouver, BC on 05/15/09 at 02:07 PM ET

“Gotta leave your gloves on when Niedermayer won’t take his visor off.”

Is Datsyuk afraid he might break a nail? It’s called hockey, look it up.

Wings fans are pathetic.

Posted by Jimmy from Windsor on 05/15/09 at 02:38 PM ET

“Any time Ron MacLean and Don Cherry are saddened by something, an angel gets its wings.”

Hilarious!

I think people see what they want to see. From the perspective of the netcam the puck was moving and never covered by Hiller. Goal. If you are rooting for the Ducks the you want to go with the overhead cam as it makes it appear that Hiller is being shoved. Of the two camera angles I think the net cam provides the more decisive picture of what occured.

Posted by BaronLeone from Cleveland on 05/15/09 at 02:54 PM ET

blammo, I edited your most recent comment with all of the **** that continued on. 

Really don’t have the time to watch over you, so please keep them to a minimum.

Posted by Paul from Motown Area on 05/15/09 at 02:58 PM ET

Plus Hiller wears make-up.

I’m sure of it after seeing a close up of him in last nights game.

Hope his make-up didn’t run from the tears.

Lil’ bitch.

Posted by Dennis DuBay from Decatur, Illinois on 05/15/09 at 03:11 PM ET

Fair enough Paul, but the previous poster told me to F myself but you don’t edit that comment? Personal slander is acceptable but criticizing the officiating is not? Oh wait, he’s from Grand Rapids, Michigan. Carry on…

Posted by blammo from Vancouver, BC on 05/15/09 at 03:14 PM ET

blammo, Location has nothing to do with it and I missed that. 

As you probably know, words are tossed around on the internet these days and I do believe your response shows you were not happy with him/her.

I try not to get involved unless I need to, numerous people subscribe to the comments and they really don’t want to read this type of comment.

Time to move on…

Posted by Paul from Motown Area on 05/15/09 at 03:22 PM ET

Agreed 100% with you Paul. There have been alot of name calling lately.

Posted by Oilers Rock from Edmonton, Alberta on 05/15/09 at 03:47 PM ET

I don’t think the goal should be allowed,wether it was covered up or not. If it’s covered the Ref should blow the whistle,if it’s not covered the Red Wing players should be able to go for the loose puck, but not THROGH the goalie, you go AROUND the goalie. Cleary pushed Hiller’s pad (through goalie) to get the puck .Although, he might’ve been trying to go underneath the pad, very tough call. As far as Cherry goes the whole world knows he’s a racist. He gave the Red Wings a break because it was Cleary (what an *#$%@&,Cherry not Cleary).He’s from Newfoundland!! Whopdedo!! Imagine if it was a European who scored the goal,he would’ve had a whole different attitude towards the incident.

Posted by Lindas1st on 05/15/09 at 04:32 PM ET

Let’s talk about the Pronger crosscheck on Hudler that led him fall over Hiller and cost #26 the minor that allow the Ducks to go 3-2… it should a powerplay for the Wings. Or the early whistle on Hossa in game 2. Let them whine all summer long… Can’t wait for tomorrow’s opening, finally @ 9 in the evening instead of 4:30 in the morning. GO WINGS!!!!

Posted by Berti from Italy on 05/16/09 at 01:48 AM ET

Wow, where do I start. Let me start with the Anaheim announcers.  They are just horrible. Almost as bad a Pierre McGuire who will not shut up. They were so painful to listen to as the series moved on. Complete homers who viewed an entirely different game then what I viewed. Secondly, perhaps we should have reviewable penalties because that was an obvious call on Prodonger’s blatant cross-check on Hudler into Hiller. Even the jacka$$ Duck announcers said Prodonger got away with one. Lastly, I too find it fitting that Cleary’s goal was called a goal, as it should, given the robbery on Hossa. Suck it up Ducks, the debate is over - you finished 5th - accept it, stop crying, enjoy Disneyland this summer.

Posted by California Mark from california on 05/16/09 at 02:24 PM ET