Wednesday, April 21, 2010
Gary Bettman defends Mike Murphy on Sedin's Disallowed Goal
Before Game 4 Wednesday night in Los Angeles between the Vancouver Canucks and Los Angeles Kings, NHL Commissioner Gary Bettman addressed complaints and comments about Daniel Sedin's controversial disallowed goal.
The play was originally ruled a goal, and by the letter of the law should not have been overturned. The NHL however claims that a video sent to all teams month's ago described goals similar to Daniel's as ones that should be disallowed.
As the Vancouver Sun reports, Bettman spent only two and a half minutes tersely answering questions on the topic.
He also defended comments by Mike Murphy, the NHL's vice-president of hockey operations, who in a CBC interview after Game 3 had indicated that Daniel Sedin "knew what he was doing."
"I think Mr. Murphy was trying to explain at 1 o'clock in the morning as best he could exactly what was going on and if he wasn't as articulate as those looking to parse his words, so be it. But as I said, I have complete confidence in Mike Murphy, Colie (Colin) Campbell and the entire hockey operations department.
"And I think this whole tact of innuendo, insinuation is both insulting and pure fantasy. I suggest everyone move on and focus on the fact that we are having terrific playoffs."
Well, that may be Gary, but if Mike Murphy cannot articulate himself and his decisions at 1am, why do we have him making decisions at 1am? Perhaps Toronto's Operations Centre should be moved out west where we can be assured they're not running on fumes and pulling all-nighters?
The NHL comes out of this looking like bush league. Any one searching for the NHL rule book will find that a puck only entering the net as a result of a 'distinct kicking motion' should be disallowed. The NHL and specifically Mike Murphy in all his wisdom once again dropped the ball. Murphy's explanation included everything from accusing Sedin or 'twisting his toe' to assessing the player's motives in regards to whether or not the goal should count.
Are you to tell me if Daniel Sedin was looking away (which he was) that we would have a good goal? But if his eyes are on the puck, it's disallowed? Isn't it enough of a joke that if the puck hit his shin and entered the net, it would have been a goal, but off his skate and in, and we're reviewing it for 7 minutes before deciding no goal?
Have a look at this goal by Todd Bertuzzi only two weeks ago, after the supposed DVD was released to teams. Why would Bertuzzi's goal count and Sedin's not?
Ron MacLean held a copy of the DVD detailing the rulings on Hockey Night in Canada tonight - would be interesting to see that appear on YouTube at some point. Canucks' Coach Alain Vigneault meanwhile reviewed the DVD and still concludes that Sedin's goal should have remained a goal.