IF the Sharks go on to win the Cup...

[Karl Eriksson]

Where is the “not at all tainted, sack up” option ?

 

[Rich Nixon]

Where is the “not at all tainted, sack up” option ?

For real.

 

[TomasHertlsRooster]

Where is the “not at all tainted, sack up” option ?

Every answer implies that if they win, their Cup will be tainted to some degree. I don’t know if the OP did it on purpose or not, but it’s a snuck premise.

 

[Juicy Pop]

The only thing tainted is Gallant's mind.

'Let's wait for them to tie it before we call a timeout.'

 

[hockeyball]

Seriously? rofl... Vegas, you don't even know what pain is, good god.

 

[GhostfaceWu]

The Knights had a 3-0 lead. Three goals! It was 5 minutes of 5 on 4.

With league average penalty killing you're averaging 0.8 goals against there. Not four.

Bad calls happen. If the Knights didn't lose their minds, panic and implode they're moving on.

And if the ref doesn't make a bonehead call after the fact when he didn't even see or know what happened other than blood on the ice and trash falling from the stands the Knights breeze by the last 10 minutes and probably shut San Jose out. I don't care if the pk didn't do their job its a farce that they were put in that position in the first place.

 

[eramosat]

When I was watching, I thought "Hmm, that's a fairly extreme call, but I totally understand what the refs did". The play did look bad as it happened, as much due to Statsny's move as Eakin's. So after the removal of the injured player, refs removed a player (either at that point would have served the purpose) from the ice who was just as likely to generate more violence at the end of a game that was practically out of reach. And I don't recall any commentator or on-ice player complaining much about the penalty call at the time.

Only in hindsight, Knights should have complained more. Because a fairly common occurrence (say once or twice a season for each and every team...a player gets a major and a game when it maybe wasn't completely warranted) got obliterated by a golden unicorn occurence (once every 3/4 seasons, for the entire NHL maybe even rarer)...a team scored 4 times on a major penalty! Let alone at such a time.

I feel sick for the Knights, and at the time felt just sooo bad for them. But they just as easily could have finished that game 3 - 0, or as winners in regulation easily...no one would have been surprised at all. And no one would be talking about that call except for how it was prudent for the refs to have removed the offender from the ice before even worse retalitation occurred. NHL will never be able to get away from that kind of threat...and the players know it, acknowledge and accept it. So do refs, who cannot act except within the context of a situation, and that's also understood.

Nothing is tainted by a Shark's Cup victory, good luck to them.

 

[skiba77777]

It won't be tainted at all. People will remember the comeback, not the penalty that started it. Nobody will hold it against them except people who are biased against them.

 

[Saskatoon]

This was a very bizarre series of events but its not the Sharks fault. I have issue with call but don't blame the team.

 

[HanSolo]

Seriously? rofl... Vegas, you don't even know what pain is, good god.

As far as I know, OP is not a Vegas fan, calm down.

 

[hockeyball]

As far as I know, OP is not a Vegas fan, calm down.

Whether he is or not, the copious threads on the topic make it pretty clear the fanbase is generally blaming the penalty for their loss, not failing to close out a series with 3 elimination attempts. Also the clear bias of the voting options here kind of implies the original poster was at least rooting for Vegas.

Certainly doesn't taint the Sharks, they didn't dive (obviously) and took advantage of an opportunity. They don't control the referee's, and what were they supposed to do, pass on a 5 minute major? Would Vegas have done the same?

Be mad at the refs if you like, but being mad at the Sharks is just absurd. Also, being a Sharks fan for much of my life, I can sympathize with feeling robbed, but I have also learned from those experiences that a team puts themselves in a position to be robbed, and they need to take responsibility for that.

 

[Voight]

99 was different because they got rid of the rule right after and the fact that Hull's goal was the winner.

Eakins penalty was in the 1st round and wasn't due to some stupid rule that became a footnote in NHL history.

 

[Albatros]

And if the ref doesn't make a bonehead call after the fact when he didn't even see or know what happened other than blood on the ice and trash falling from the stands the Knights breeze by the last 10 minutes and probably shut San Jose out. I don't care if the pk didn't do their job its a farce that they were put in that position in the first place.

O'Halloran had a good view, you can see his perspective at 1:21 here:

 

[CanadienShark]

Not at all tainted. Bad calls went both ways this series and directly influenced games both ways.

 

[spiny norman]

Lopsided result.