NO goal or goal?

Well obviously everyone knows the playoffs Star vs Sabres Stanley cup game 6
overtime
Was Brett Hulls foot in the crease

I say yes and No goal

 

no goal

 

It's not even debatable. Back then, any part of your skate inside the crease = no goal.

No ifs, ands or buts about it.

 

No Goal!

 

Dallas would likely still have won though. So I wouldn't lose too much sleep over this.

 

It was highway robbery...

 

no goal, although I was glad that this horribly boring series was over.

 

Should not have counted. Dallas probably would have won the series anyways, but Buffalo still got hosed.

 

Nevermind the 1 for goal as I clicked the wrong button.

 

Not even close, no goal.

 

Who Cares?

Get over it already! If Atlanta Braves fans were like the Sabres fans, we'd still be calling the Twins cheaters......

 

lol

 

It was a goal.

 

According to the rules, no you're right it was no goal. But now that we have some comon sense it really WAS a goal. That was a ridiculous rule that spanned for three years and ended on that day. I once saw a goal called back because a guy had his foot in the crease - when the net was empty! Yeah no kidding.

The truth is Dallas was the better team. They deserved to win. Buffalo was lucky just to be there. Dallas had 114 points that year if I remember correctly.

And think about this one. If the goal was called back and Buffalo then scored and then went on to beat Dallas in game 7 there would be even more outcry. I think that would be even MORE unfair. So I said no goal, but in reality it was a goal. This was just a dumb rule dreamt up by Brian Burke. Suck it up Sabres fans, you'll never win a Cup! lol

 

The rule was only in effect that one year only and Dominik Hasek could have cemented his legacy as the greatest goalie of the modern era with that cup. Hasek is the greatest goalie of the modern era, but, some doubters exist because of that goal which should have been disallowed.

 

Of course it was a goal. Hull had the puck on his stick when his foot went into the crease, it was pushed out of the crease...right back onto his stick, when he scored. He has the right to go into the crease to get the puck AFTER THE PUCK IS IN THERE. And he did at the time, too.

Anyway, it doesn't matter. Dallas would have won the series and the Cup either way. No way Buffalo wins 3 straight from that Dallas team that year.

 

Acutally no that rule was in effect for three years. Remember in 1998? Joe Juneau had his foot in the crease while Axelsson scored an OT winner in the playoffs against Washington. Washington goes onto win the game and the series and all you can do is read Pat Burns lips shouting on the bench "That's ****ing Horse***!" This rule effected a lot of teams at a lot of times. Boston would have went up 2-1 in games if they won that. And to think Washington actually made the finals that year! Yikes!

 

The idea behind the rule isn't the problem. The way it was enforced was the problem. When going upstairs on a crease call, the referee could only ask the video goal judge "Was a player in the crease before the puck?" If the answer was yes, regardless of how the player got in the crease, it was a no goal. The excuse the NHL gave after Game 6 in 1999 (several days after the fact, no less), was nothing more than spin doctoring. They never changed the rule. They came out with this bogus comment, supported by one instance of video evidence, to try to shut everyone up. It didn't work.

In the end, vespajet said it best: "Who Cares?" Get over it. Dallas goes on to win the series.

 

Buffalo scores in OT, we go to Game 7 and anything can happen in Game 7

 

No goal.

Even less of a goal in the other SC Finals game 6, but they called that one right at least.

 

And with Hasek in the net anything can happen.

 

Particularly when Dallas players admitted that they probably would have played like garbage in a game 7, because they were old and tired. The average age difference of the two teams was something like 6 years. That's a lot of extra mileage.

 

Of course it was a goal, but youre wrong in your assessment. It shouldnt have counted (the fact that you are part of the gross minority should clue you in to that).

But it did count and no amount of polls, threads or *****ing will change that. Gretzky should have got a high-sticking penalty vs the leafs, the goal shouldnt have counted vs Buffalo... how many more could we find in history?

 

i second this motion

 

Thank-you Mr. Bettman.

But, we didn't buy it then and we don't buy it now.