Skip to content

"Too many men" for Sharks not a big deal

May 5, 2010, 4:45 PM EDT

Sharks.jpgThere’s a screencap making the rounds today that shows seven men on
the ice for the Sharks at the moment when Patrick Marleau was scoring
the winning goal in overtime last night against the Detroit Red Wings.
Here’s a link to the screencap, courtesy of Greg Wyshynski.

What it shows is two Sharks players looking down the ice near the
bench, as their teammates jump on the ice during a line change. The play
is far down the ice with Joe Thornton already making the pass across to
Marleau. Is this technically “too many men on the ice” for the Sharks?
Technically, yes but it’s far from the egregious penalty that some may
point it out to be.

This line change is really no different than any others you see
throughout a game, especially with the play on the other end of the ice.
Is it a bit of a lazy change, especially with the two off-going players
gazing down the ice? Of course it is, but the change had absolutely no
bearing on the play that happened.

The good news is that from what I’ve seen, the majority of Wings fans
are saying that the game was not lost on this one “missed call”. Still,
I’m almost 90% certain this wouldn’t have been brought up if it didn’t
happen to the Red Wings.

  1. GhostofFlorio - May 5, 2010 at 5:53 PM

    And I’m almost 90% certain the series has been plagued by horrendously poor refereeing all around.
    Given how tightly they’ve called other penalties for absolute ticky-tack, why not call this one too?

  2. PolegoJim - May 5, 2010 at 9:08 PM

    I agree Ghosto…but not all around. The Wings have been clipped by the zebras, ridiculously so… the penalty to Bertuzzi, then this. It’s almost too much to bear.

  3. Dorro - May 5, 2010 at 10:34 PM

    I don’t think it should matter that the play was lazy and didn’t affect the game. You’re a professional team that is supposed to be setting an example that you are not lazy/sloppy. On top of that, all the ridiculous calls, or lack thereof, just keep on piling up making things like this even more of a spectacular mess. The wings just seem to get trashed every time they enter the post-season.

  4. Sharky - May 5, 2010 at 11:46 PM

    Looked like Canadian Zebras to me.

  5. Sharkfan - May 6, 2010 at 12:39 AM

    It’s a normal f’ing line change – get over it dead wings fans.

  6. flamesfan - May 6, 2010 at 3:14 AM


  7. Whoabot Jones - May 6, 2010 at 3:45 AM

    Team has possession. Team has 7 men on ice (8 counting the goalie), with two that are not actively getting changing. Sorry. That’s too many men on the ice. Not a “normal f’ing line change.” Look at the Too Many Men called on Detroit in Game 2. lrn2hockey

  8. Rob - May 6, 2010 at 7:44 AM

    Red Wings fans are crybabies. They act spoiled and privledged. Like Cup is always “owed” to them because of their history. Their fans are big jag-offs. Like Flyers fans. Capitals fans. Canadiens fans. You all suck! So does Brandon and Mike Florio.

  9. Jim - May 6, 2010 at 8:19 AM

    Ha Ha Red Wings Fans. You’re getting swept and blame it on the refs. How embarrassing.

  10. Kovalev27 - May 6, 2010 at 9:34 AM

    Lol at sharks fan, you should be the ones embarassed. With all the first / second rounds exit you had in the last decade, don’t come here and act as if you we’re a big winning team and the other teams all sucks.

  11. Buzz - May 6, 2010 at 9:34 AM

    Red Wings Suck. I get sick and tired of the Red Wings fans whining when their team just loses a game because they were simply outplayed by a superior team. Grow up and take it like real fans. Your precious DEAD WINGS don’t have anything owed to them, they just need to play better.DUH!!!!!!!!

  12. 2late2matter - May 6, 2010 at 11:59 AM

    Dunno why the rant, Rob. Rules are rules that are to be enforced against both teams.
    From the [provided] screen cap, there are indeed 7 Shark skaters + the goalie on the active ice – with a referee watching who should have blown his whistle and assessed the penalty.
    In hockey, it is what it is. In this case a clear cut penalty that became a potential game-winning goal. Not making a case here, but simply stating the obvious to you.

  13. john lewis - May 6, 2010 at 1:03 PM

    As a Wing fan I have to put this loss on Howard. The 2nd and 3rd goals were atrocious. Game one the Wings were tired. Game 2 was clearly one sided officiating. The Wings have played more hockey than anyone the last two years. They look pretty tired. And hey, most of them have 3 or 4 cups to their name already. Hope they can regroup and get some breaks, but if not, it’s been a great run!

  14. chico rodrigo - May 6, 2010 at 1:06 PM

    good for the red wings they had to fall around n draw penalties to kick out phoenix…red wings are done!!!! go hole river snipers!!!!!

  15. Bob - May 6, 2010 at 1:07 PM

    this is a good example of…nothing. should there have been a penalty? yeah, maybe. but it doesnt matter. the wings lost that game in period 3. not on this botched call. i think real wings fans will be upset with their boys for blowing their lead in the 3rd period. and the defensive lapse that lead to the overtime winner.

  16. Bob2 - May 6, 2010 at 1:27 PM

    This is clearly a case of the media trying to make a story out of nothing. This is a typical line change in hockey, and anyone who has ever played knows that.

  17. Wingnut - May 6, 2010 at 1:53 PM

    I’ve been a Wings fan my entire life. I’ve especially enjoyed that we play hockey well into May for the last 20 seasons. And we have several Cups to show for it. (Other than my opinion I think Detroit should be in the Eastern Conference, I really can’t complain about too much.)
    I will readily admit that the Sharks seem to have a quicker step than the Wings this series, especially in transitions after gaining possession of the puck. Detroit appears to be tired (some, not all players!), probably from all the body wear going 4 rounds deep the last two years and having to play on the road all playoffs this year (3 time zones!! The Eastern road teams never have to change their watches!! There I go again… Moral of the story: Don’t finish 5th in the Conference! Makes me appreciate what other teams have had to face playing the Wings most post-seasons!)
    Win or lose this round, it’s been a pleasure watching them as always! I’m proud of the Red Wings and their entire organization!

  18. Sandy - May 6, 2010 at 1:58 PM

    The Wings have played more hockey than anyone else?? WTF! I do believe it is an 80 game season for everyone, and correct me if I’m wrong, Pittsburgh went through to the Cup final last year so don’t give us the ‘they’re tired” excuse. They’re old, that’s the problem. Time to bring in some young legs.

  19. Aaron - May 6, 2010 at 2:11 PM

    again with the officiating? Too many men on the ice calls are NEVER called unless a player changing affects the play when his replacement has already stepped on the ice…. NOT ONCE, do you see players wait for their teammates to completely leave the ice before they hop over the boards, this is no different. This is far from “too many men on the ice” as the play is in no way impacted. I’ll watch the next game tonight and make sure that the Wings players wait until skates have left the ice before they step on themselves. If you want to watch “bending the rules”, watch Bertuzzi play just one shift and you will count atleast 10 things he does that “could” get called for penalties. He holds the opponents stick more than any player I’ve ever seen.

  20. Aaron - May 6, 2010 at 2:24 PM

    kudos. exactly my point. if a player vacating the ice or his replacement touch the puck or step in front of an opposing player and alter a play before the exiting player is completely off the ice, then its called, otherwise….. TYPICAL CHANGE. I played for 20 years, and I would say I see that 30 times a game.

  21. Tim - May 6, 2010 at 6:29 PM

    Aaron nailed it. The extra players were not involved. As far as penalties go, Detroit drew 10, 2 of which were questionable, in game 2. It happens all season long. There is a lot that don’t get called as well. So that leaves 8, which is more than you want at this time of the season. Why so many? When you get beat or out of position it seems better to get the penalty than letting the other team score and hope for the PK. And the penalties seem to pyle up towards the end of the game for the Redwings when they are on on their heels.

  22. Mosie Ledbetter - May 7, 2010 at 1:18 AM

    Except that they’ve been calling it throughout the playoffs, including on the Wings with a couple of minutes left in the game. Blackhawks got called three times in a game. They missed this one, but they’ve missed so much (and made up others) that no one should be shocked.

  23. Mosie Ledbetter - May 7, 2010 at 1:28 AM

    You haven’t been watching this year’s playoffs– this has been called repeatedly (including against Detroit with 3 minutes left in game 2 on a less obvious violation than this one). I agree during the regular season they hadn’t called it like this, but they have been throughout the playoffs. Look up the number of too many men penalties thus far. Being consistent is what refs need to do, and they sure haven’t been this postseason.

  24. CoastalLiving - May 13, 2010 at 1:36 PM

    Anyone who thinks this is a penalty doesn’t watch hockey.

  25. Greyshark - May 13, 2010 at 3:19 PM

    Over 20 posts on the topic … and nobody’s mentioned the obvious: that the rules explicitly PERMIT substitution when the player coming off is within 5 feet of the bench.
    So is the gripe here that the two sharks players coming off are more than 5 feet from the bench (is it 6 feet or 7? ) so its a penalty and therefore the winning goal shouldn’t have been allowed? COME ON, TAKE A PILL.
    In contrast to this non-call, most of the “too many men” calls show 6 or more skaters fully committed and involved in positioning for a play on the ice, a result of confusion on the bench. Doh!

  26. bk - May 13, 2010 at 3:56 PM

    anyone have a problem with franzen knocking thornton’s stick out of his hands away from play just before detroit’s goal? refs make good calls. refs make bad calls. that’s how it is. that’s how it always will be. was the pavelski penalty shot warranted? debatable. i’d have been fine with a simple 2 minutes. zetterberg’s penalty shot was an absolute blown call. replay clearly shows couture sliding the puck to nabby not covering it. but again, that’s the game.

  27. zetterberg fan - May 16, 2010 at 6:40 PM

    So….now that the series is over…look at the calls again, and I hope they dont go your way against the Hawks.
    What was up with the penalty zetterberg got. When he got slashed….wtf….you can play all the clips and listen to all the comintators…they mostly agreee…REFS SUCKED!! Cost us the series with you and almost the series with the coyotes. At any rate sharks fans…..just remember We have been to the playoffs 19 years in a row. 19 biotches….not to mention HOW MANY CUPS….try to take a bite out of that and congrats on your loss today to the hawks!!!!

  28. sensical - May 17, 2010 at 4:32 PM

    Wow, so many EXTREME feelings from people. Let me ask you something, when people ask you if you are a hockey fan do you say “yes” or “yes but I’m more a fan of complaining about refereeing when my team doesn’t win”? Were there some bad calls, of course, show me one perfectly reffed series in history. It’s sad that only one in a handful of Red Wings can respect the Sharks for being an elite team and still appreciate the Wings accomplishments separately. And um Zetterberg fan, I don’t think we sharks fans are trying to “take a bite out of” any your accomplishments, we’re just asking that you stop crying just because you won’t make it to your third straight cup

  29. clint beastwood - May 25, 2010 at 11:27 AM

    They’ve gone furthest in the playoffs, most often. More playoffs = more games. They’ve played over 400 games in the past four years, actually, which is way more than any other team. 82(4) regular season games + 77 playoff games = 405. They’re not old, just tired.

  30. joe - Jun 6, 2010 at 10:38 PM


Top 10 NHL Player Searches
  1. P. Kane (1896)
  2. P. Kessel (1739)
  3. M. Richards (1489)
  4. P. Datsyuk (1289)
  5. N. Backstrom (1216)