There ya go...run away and cry when someone proves you wrong, why was it reported? Cause you started talking trash and I returned the favor? Or cause facts hurt your feelings?
- corvusmd

Before this post, i had never heard of corvusmd:

"WOW, this blogger apparently did not watch the game at all. True the NHL came out before the game was even over, and said that the call was horrible. The Sharks should have been on a 4 minute power-play to Duncan Keith (should have been 6 for getting his ass whooped by one of the Sharks' smallest players). True, it wasn't garunteed that the Sharks would score on that 4 minutes, no uneven strength goals were scored for either side last night, but I was at the game. Despite winning, ALL Hawks players KNOW they got away with one last night, they carried the momentum for NO PART of that game, they were thoroughly out-played all night, other than one goal (two counting the empty net), Hawks didn't earn a single goal, they were handed to them by mistakes by the Sharks (true, part of the game...it happens, but pretending that the Hawks scored them with skill is lying to yourself).

As far as bad calls, they were going all night, there was missed holding and late checks, slashes, and even a 4 minute high sticking that were missed all night...mysteriously only one way...but the Sharks are used to dealing with that, so that's not an excuse...especially against teams like Detroit, Vancouver, and Hawks where it's well known around the league they get the Ref's favor (I was actually explaining this exact thing to a girl I was taking to her first game on the way there). As far as the Major missed call, not only did we lose a player that was playing well for the rest of the game, but we definitely had the momentum when it happened. In the second period we out shot the Hawks 12-6...at the time of the penalty shots were roughly 9-2 with more than half the period left.

In closing, this blogger and fans like him can stick their nose in the air for the day and pretend their team earned this one, but no Sharks fan or Hawks player actually feels they earned this one through skill or being the better team...lucky bounces, sure....Sharks mistakes, definitely helped....poor officiating, to be expected, but especially bad last night. I know none of you want to hear this, but SOMEONE has to tell you what the rest of the league knows...you don't want to admit it, but I'm your best friend right now"

Yet I started it. What planet are you on?

Even though I'm a Bay Area resident now, I'm thoroughly enjoying all the California stereotypes being thrown out. Teal Cabriolet? Nice...

Wow you Hawks fans are much more sensitive than I expected. I though Chicago was supposed to be tough. In my original point I simply stated that the blogger was wrong for saying that SJ fans were simply whining about a call that even the NHL and Hawks announcers called a good solid hockey hit. True Sharks lost, I'm ok with that, we played better than the Hawks did last night, and controlled the play nearly all night. We lost, but not due to a superior performance by the Hawks. The Hawks are an EXCELLENT team, but they weren't last night. Other than two goals, they came off of mistakes by our D and lucky bounces...other than those mistakes by a few players, Sharks were by far controlling the game...even the Hawks fan behind me was complaining about how the Hawks couldn't even clear their own zone most of the time.
- corvusmd

Oh, Good Lord.

No I'm educated, and I didn't ride a short bus with a helmet. However, thanks for proving my point that you're childish. When all evidence and facts go against you being wrong, but you can't stand to see that your team isn't blessed by god...instead of just saying..."hey, we got away with one last night against a really good team...perhaps better than us" you instantly try and engage in reductio ad absurdum and attack the messenger "We you attack the messenger and not the message, you have lost the debate" -Addison Withcomb

The NHL, and your own TV announcers say you're wrong, but you can't stand to believe it. If you were truly confident in your teams ability to be a top team, this wouldn't trouble you, it stings cause you know I'm right.
- corvusmd

Your entire argument rests on the Sharks scoring on a double-minor and that there would be any double minor to begin. Whose to say, the call would not have been charging and Keith gets the 2/2/5/10? That would result in 2-min 4-on-4 followed by a single 2-min Sharks PP; again the Sharks scoring.

Also, your argument falls apart in that it alludes to the Sharks not doing well 4-on-4. What will that team do with OT games later this season? Ask to go right to the shootout?

That's great that you are so educated, and can launch some Latin JJ's way, but I think you, like your fellow Sharks fan Deke failed to read the blog. And if the Sharks were such a better team, as you say, why couldn't Jumbo No-Show Joe and Marleau put their big boy pants on and help prevent their team from blowing two 2-goal leads? Nobody is crowning the Hawks as SC champs, certainly not on this board.

And you'd notice most of us agreed that Desjardins' hit shouldn't have gotten him thrown out. That being said, to make excuses like "that hit changes the entire game" is ridiculous. And trading a 4th liner for a top 2 d-man in the scheme of penalties should've been the true momentum changer but your superior sharks never got it back in gear.
- prd797

You clearly aren't reading my posts either....That trade would have been great if we got the PP out of it...I was saying that right before we got the match penalty. But I did also say that NOT EVERYONE thinks that it was a bad hit...I was only talking to those that do...and this blogger

Thanks best friend....

Hey look, there's Brian Campbell. Go boo him.....
- yahoodi

GOOD one...

You clearly aren't reading my posts either....That trade would have been great if we got the PP out of it...I was saying that right before we got the match penalty. But I did also say that NOT EVERYONE thinks that it was a bad hit...I was only talking to those that do...and this blogger
- corvusmd

READ. THE. BLOG.

Your entire argument rests on the Sharks scoring on a double-minor and that there would be any double minor to begin. Whose to say, the call would not have been charging and Keith gets the 2/2/5/10? That would result in 2-min 4-on-4 followed by a single 2-min Sharks PP; again the Sharks scoring.

Also, your argument falls apart in that it alludes to the Sharks not doing well 4-on-4. What will that team do with OT games later this season? Ask to go right to the shootout?
- blackhawk24

The NHL said it should have been a dbl minor to Keith, that's what I'm basing it on, there was no charging, they called it a solid hockey hit. My argument never alluded to 4 on 4 anything.

Oh, Good Lord.
- John Jaeckel

Please do not feed the troll. I was just guilty of that too my good man.

Great write up BTW, no need to defend it several times more on the board due to a couple dumb-asses.

The NHL said it should have been a dbl minor to Keith, that's what I'm basing it on, there was no charging, they called it a solid hockey hit. My argument never alluded to 4 on 4 anything.
- corvusmd

OK, so no Sharks penalty. Fine. You still cannot assume the Sharks score on the PP; against the best PK unit in the NHL @ 95%. Remember what happens when you "assume" something.

Who was controlling the puck when Toews stole the puck and passed it to Kane for the game winner???

Yeah the Sharks did, just before the take-away

Please do not feed the troll. I was just guilty of that too my good man.

Great write up BTW, no need to defend it several times more on the board due to a couple dumb-asses.
- blackhawk24

Incredibly sour dumb-asses too, it seems.

Please do not feed the troll. I was just guilty of that too my good man.

Great write up BTW, no need to defend it several times more on the board due to a couple dumb-asses.
- blackhawk24

Thank you, I'm done. Seriously though, this thread is getting pretty funny.

READ. THE. BLOG.
- John Jaeckel

I have, and I noticed that you said you think it was a bad hit because he left his feet. I'm saying the NHL War room said that after careful review...NOTHING was wrong with the hit, but you felt it necessary to state that Sharks fans are just whining.

I'd be upset too if I lived in the sausagefest that is....

Man Jose.

Who was controlling the puck when Toews stole the puck and passed it to Kane for the game winner???

Yeah the Sharks did, just before the take-away
- Elliots07

But that was an uncharacteristic "mistake" by Murray, not an opportunistic play by one of the top 5 players in the league. Come on!!

You clearly aren't reading my posts either....That trade would have been great if we got the PP out of it...I was saying that right before we got the match penalty. But I did also say that NOT EVERYONE thinks that it was a bad hit...I was only talking to those that do...and this blogger
- corvusmd

But he doesnt think it was penalty. The short bus comment is distasteful, but since you like to put down those who are handicapped here is some truth for you internet superman. You do not know this sport if you think the Sharks outplayed the hawks. Secondly, the hit happened, the call happened and the game is over. Your team had a two goal lead, went to sleep, and bang the same old Sharks came out to played. You were swept in four games on the hawks way to Hockey's ultimate prize. Congrats on being a hockey fan since the Sharks first year. Maybe bc you were such a great contributer to this board today, I will send you a medal in the mail entitled "Im a D-Bag"

I have, and I noticed that you said you think it was a bad hit because he left his feet. I'm saying the NHL War room said that after careful review...NOTHING was wrong with the hit, but you felt it necessary to state that Sharks fans are just whining.
- corvusmd

NO, Corvus, what I said was because it appeared he left his feet, I could see why the linesman would make the call. That's what I said. let's argue about what I actually said, OK?

The other thing is, your whole argument rests on the fallacious notion that the Sharks outplayed the Hawks all night. They didn't.

OK, so no Sharks penalty. Fine. You still cannot assume the Sharks score on the PP; against the best PK unit in the NHL @ 95%. Remember what happens when you "assume" something.
- blackhawk24

I agree, you are all assuming too much (that are commenting back to me) I did admit that in a game with no uneven scoring, it was not guaranteed that we would score...but thanks for reading what I wrote first.

I also took issue with the blogger saying that the Hawks carried the momentum for the majority of the game...there were spurts of course like with every hockey game, but for the majority of the night they looked off

Someone should call a WAAAAAAAAAAAAMBULANCE
- eburgio

After the Waaahburger and french cries?

But that was an uncharacteristic "mistake" by Murray, not an opportunistic play by one of the top 5 players in the league. Come on!!
- John Jaeckel

My bad, My bad I will go to the box for 2 minutes and feel shame....................

NO, Corvus, what I said was because it appeared he left his feet, I could see why the linesman would make the call. That's what I said. let's argue about what I actually said, OK?

The other thing is, your whole argument rests on the fallacious notion that the Sharks outplayed the Hawks all night. They didn't.
- John Jaeckel

But, but the Sharks had more shots on goal! That equates to playing better, my logic is undeniable!

NO, Corvus, what I said was because it appeared he left his feet, I could see why the linesman would make the call. That's what I said. let's argue about what I actually said, OK?

The other thing is, your whole argument rests on the fallacious notion that the Sharks outplayed the Hawks all night. They didn't.
- John Jaeckel

Then why would you bring it up and call us whiner about the hit. If you also said you could see our point about being upset about it, I missed it, and that would change the dynamic entirely, but you went straight to calling us whiners of a call that was deemed a bad call by more than just Sharks fans

But, but the Sharks had more shots on goal! That equates to playing better, my logic is undeniable!


- prd797

Definitely better quality shots, I agree

I agree, you are all assuming too much (that are commenting back to me) I did admit that in a game with no uneven scoring, it was not guaranteed that we would score...but thanks for reading what I wrote first.

I also took issue with the blogger saying that the Hawks carried the momentum for the majority of the game...there were spurts of course like with every hockey game, but for the majority of the night they looked off
- corvusmd

From about midway through the first period on. Yes, take issue all you want.