Get used to this pic Canucks fans...
 

A picture tells a thousand words.

http://www.amacontent.com/banners/kings.jpg

i'd take a look at the canucks playing history

lucky fucking win. Raycroft if shit and that goal should of been allowed. No kicking motion.

Typical Canadian hockey fan. only knows end result , doesnt know rules. His foot was in a kicking motion. NO GOAL!!!!!!!! His toe lifted as his foot went foward. Hence kicking. Whether he did it on purpose or not. WTF u mean lucky win. even if goal counts its 5-4 final. Kings powerplay is relentless. Goal by Richardson was a hustle goal. Stop whining.

I guess that means the american commentators are also canadian hockey fans because they all agreed there was no kicking motion and it should have been a goal.

imo the kings played better hockey so they won the game, period end of story. The call on the goal was wrong, doesnt matter who won. It could have influenced the outcome of the game. But even as a canucks fan i realise that if they got the goal and even if they won the game the kings played better hockey.

UH i dont even like the kings but there was 100% a kicking motion, it doesnt mean he does it on purpose it means KICKING MOTION.

Im sure the guys in the war room know the rules and what they are doing. Theres more than 1 guy making the decision. When I look at video closely, he made a slight kicking motion. No 2 ways about it. Whether intentionally or not. It looked like he may have been trying to stop and accidentally kicked the puck....

read this.. INTENTION IS NOT AN ISSUE !

is whetehr he does it or not. If you hit a puck with a high stick accidentally, doesnt matter, whistle blows. Same here.

You can be dam sure Sedin knew where the puck was and what he was doing. That fucker can play with a blindfold on.

All those who dont agree it was kicking do this..

Sit or stand in one spot, lift your right toe off the floor and slide your foot foward.

THAT CONSTITUTES A KICK which is what Sedin did.

Kings FTW!!!

I think you missed the point. seasoned veterans watching the game and watching the slow-mo's ALL agreed it should have been a goal, the decision came down from above, not from the ref's not from the commentators watching the game.

Before the call from upstairs , all the experts in hockey and seasoned veterans who have played professional hockey for YEARS commentating all agreed it should be a goal. Personally i can say i have NEVER seen a goal invalidated from a bounce off the OUTSIDE of a skate. ( mainly because it is next to impossible if not impossible to kick a puck with the outside of your leading foot while using the same foot to balance. try it by sliding sideways in socks on the kitchen floor then use your leading foot to kick a box of jello outwards, now try it while being manhandled by a 200+ lb guy and balancing on a ruler :winkwink: )


In my opinion the goal was silly anyways , regardless of the intention of the skater, the pass was made to bounce off a skate, that is a cheezy goal and those shouldn't be allowed anyways. Now maybe they took this into account when disqualifying the goal , maybe not, they shouldn't have because it isn't part of the rule.


p.s. if you know anything about canucks fans , you know they are the best playoff choke team around , canucks choke better than anyone around, so they are well used to the picture you posted :winkwink:

lol why use an example that is nothing like what happened. Was he sitting still or being grappled while coming towards the net at full speed ?

All those who think kicking means your toe coming off the ground do this. Stick a box of jello on the ground in front of your foot, now recite a poem about flowers and have a guy yank you down from behind, notice that your foot came off the ground and the box of jello moved forward. Did you realise you werent reciting a poem but you were actually kicking a box of jello ?

Obviously youve never played before

OOOPS that wasnt meant for you Smokey the Bear.

I do firmly belive tho even if goal counted , Kings would still have won.

Now theres a knowledgable Canadian

Call could have gone either way. I saw the slo-mo replay and thought it was a tough call. Had I been the ref (and I have ref'd games in years gone by. I also have over 21 years of playing the game in various Canadian leagues, and over 40 years of watching NHL) I may very well have called that a goal. Or not. Hard to say. First instinct says I lean toward agreeing with the "it was a goal" side, but I can accept this ref's call though. Congrats to the Kings. Regardless of the non-goal they deserved the win. Canucks looked good in the 1st period and then didn't show up for the rest of the game.

Now time to move on to game 4. 'nucks need to win it at all costs.

30 yrs or so.. how bout you ?

oops , edit , didn't see your edit, heh

"Seasoned vertans" dont always mean what they say and are barely ever non biased to what is going on.

you can bet all the Ex forwards would call it a goal, all the ex goalies and defenders would say no goal.

FUCKIN EH 30 years.. hit me up on ICQ and lets talk hockey during playoffs. Come to LA and join me at one of my STaples Center skates.

Men on ice like to hug in public? :1orglaugh :1orglaugh

I like womens handball, there its out

Penguins ftw. :-)

The vancouver canucks: one of the best teams in the regular season... collapsing in the playoffs.

What's new? :(