I normally I do not write this quick between blogs, but a mystery has occurred. I am perplexed and I need some help with a problem. Maybe some of you can help me.
The Red Wings seem to think that its alright to hit and run the Ducks goalie, Hiller, and the NHL seems to agree with them. Interesting -- when is running a goalie a penalty or not a penalty? It seems that Franzen has been given a free reign. But before we jump all over Franzen, all he is doing is seeing what he can get away with. No, I have no trouble with what Franzen did, I have trouble with the NHL, who have a split personality when it comes to running the goalie.
Now in all fairness to Franzen, the first run at Hiller was because of the cheap, I mean cheap not matter what anyone says, Brown elbow hit on Jiri Hudler. I know it was not intended to be a vicious hit, but it was a nasty dirty hit and deserved a major. The Ducks had to know the retaliation had to come. That does not make it right, but it's a fact in today's hockey world - an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth. So Franzen runs Hiller after he scores, knocks his mask all across the rink. Franzen's goal counts, no penalty, of course the Ducks are not happy.
Now let's enter the twilight zone, where we land in Boston, and the score is 1-0 Bruins. The Caines score to tie the game on a nice shot by Jussi Jokinen. Yet after the goal, Mr. Bayda runs after Thomas, and guess what? Bayda gets two minutes. Remember, Franen running Hiller, now what happened there? Oh yeah: zip, nada, nothing. Yet people wonder why the players are confused? Guess I am left scratching my bald head (I do mean bald) wondering what is going on.
Let's skip to the last 49 seconds or so of the game, Lindstrom scores the winning goal, and our Mr. Franzen is getting to know Mr. Hiller again, and the Wings win again. Now in all fairness, I have seen highlights of the winning goal. It was not as obvious goalie interference. The ref might have missed it. The problem I am having is that I am not sure if the ref would have called it if he did see it. The inconsistency is what drives me crazy, Calls being called and not being called . . . what is a penalty? Someone please explain it to me.
Now I really do not care who wins the series. I am just a simple minded blogger who does not understand what running the goalie is. Really, if players are going to run the goalie, there has to be some consequence, or does there? I really don't care as long as it's consistent. Please, if it's a penalty in one game, why is it not a penalty in another game?
Maybe someone has not explained it to all the refs. Maybe some refs hate goalies; can that be it? Or maybe some refs hate goalies. Were they beaten up by a goalie as a kid? Maybe a goalie stole their lunch money. Or just maybe no one understands the rule. Hey, Mr. Bettman, can you maybe explain it to us? Oh wait, never mind what was I ever thinking?