Skip to content

Video: PHT Extra – Should Wings be upset about penalty shot call?

May 29, 2013, 7:42 AM EDT

Two weeks ago, if you had told the Detroit Red Wings that this series would go to Game 7, they would have seen that as a positive. After taking a 3-1 series lead on Thursday, they were hoping to avoid this fate. They failed.

So will they be able to stay focused and convince themselves that this Game 7 is a positive sign? Especially seeing as Game 6 was ultimately decided by a penalty shot stemming from a call that “surprised” the transgressor.

Mike Halford and Jason Brough reflected on the events that led us here and look ahead to tonight’s contest:

This video is no longer available. Click here to watch more NBC Sports videos!
  1. howintensive - May 29, 2013 at 8:00 AM

    I’m pretty upset about it. It definitely didn’t constitute a penalty shot, especially in the playoffs, when the refs are known to be lenient. That penalty shot could have won the series for Chicago.

  2. mb65dod - May 29, 2013 at 8:17 AM

    How much longer we are going to beat dead horse? I don’t remember seeing so many articles after dissallowed goal…

    • xtrememachine1 - May 29, 2013 at 9:00 AM

      The disallowed goal earlier in the series was the refs way of correcting their mistake for not penalizing the Hawks when Franzen got pushed head first into the boards and then not blowing the whistle while he’s injured.

      • indianhead1992 - May 29, 2013 at 10:23 AM

        So Wings fans want the refs to swallow the whistle but are upset on the boarder line boarding call. By the way when the team has the puke they dont blow the whistle until the team with the injured player gains possesion. So before you get upset with refs and their calls, know the rules yourself. Refs have screwed both teams this series, stop whinning its game 7. Games 1-6 doesnt matter anymore!

  3. kcprof926 - May 29, 2013 at 8:18 AM

    What a joke. Read the rules. It was a good call. What about the bogus call in game 3 for a hawk player in the crease. That would have tied the score. Plus refs should not be lenient

    • xtrememachine1 - May 29, 2013 at 8:58 AM

      I’m sorry, but that play didn’t warrant a penalty shot. If that play warrants a penalty shot, there should be a lot more penalty shots in the game because what happened there happens all the time. Its not why the Wings lost, but it was a bad call, plain and simple.

      • comeonnowguys - May 29, 2013 at 9:07 AM

        I thought it was a bad call at first. Then I fired up the old google thingamajig and went to the rulebook.

        Going 66 mph in a 55 mph is still speeding. You may not always get pulled over, but you can’t complain when the officer gives you a ticket.

  4. polegojim - May 29, 2013 at 8:31 AM

    Forget the shot… be upset about the other two goals in the third period.

    3 times the Wings have provided the Hawks with such a generous third period.

    If the Wings D did it’s job earlier… the penalty shot wouldn’t have even mattered.

    Tighten it up and get back to the physical play that won you three in a row.

    Let’s GO RED WINGS!

  5. Florio's Lawyer - May 29, 2013 at 8:34 AM

    The rules are clear, and it was a good call, playoffs or not.
    Upset = whining.
    Get over it.

    • jeffchadwick - May 29, 2013 at 9:21 AM

      I don’t think I’ve seen a single Red Wing “upset” about the call. Fans? Maybe, but certainly not anybody from the organization itself.

    • hockeydon10 - May 29, 2013 at 10:58 AM

      It’s not really so much about the call, it’s about the inconsistency. It’s about how nobody, not the fans, not the players, not the coaches, knows what will be a penalty from one minute to the next, let alone one game to the next.

      I’m not arguing whether it was a bad call or a good call. I’m saying it was yet another example of inconsistent calls made in all games throughout the playoffs so far.

      In this series alone, both teams have gotten breakaways where a d-man chases down the forward and interferes with the ability to get a shot away. It wasn’t a penalty in all the previous plays. That’s really why so many fans are upset, even if they won’t admit it. That’s why Colaiavaco was surprised a penalty shot call was made.

  6. tmoore4075 - May 29, 2013 at 8:40 AM

    If they called things consistently I’d have no problem with the call really. It’s that you see worse stuff called just a penalty or completely let go. Yes it was a penalty and yes it was probably a penalty shot by the rule book. But there were a lot of things that should have been penalties by the rule book that haven’t been called by the refs throughout the Stanley Cup playoffs.

  7. indianhead1992 - May 29, 2013 at 10:34 AM

    The reason why it was a penalty shot is because the slash made Frolik loose the puck, which probably would have happen with out the slash. If it were Toews, Kane, Hossa, or Sharp then that slash may be reasonable to make but Frolik? No who is on the ice and dont give Frolik a penalty shot in the playoffs, 2 for 2 now for him. I believe the only player in NHL history to score two penalty shots in the playoffs.

  8. nateriemer - May 29, 2013 at 10:47 AM

    Short answer, no. If anyone on the Wings is dwelling on that call they won’t be focused on game 7, and to their credit I haven’t heard them making a stink about it. While I don’t agree with the call, the team can’t waste time on something they can do nothing about. People saying that the rule book should be enforced to the letter must not be too familiar with playoff hockey, there is always a little more let go. That is why the playoffs are so intense. Was it a penalty? I guess he tapped him on the hand, but Frolik didn’t make much of an effort to get his shot off, I could have lived with two minutes but a penalty shot seemed excessive. However, I digress, Wings have a chance to take down the #1 seed if they play hard,get pucks and bodies to the net and stay out of the box. Go Wings!

  9. disp350 - May 29, 2013 at 12:18 PM

    If you read the Penalty Shot rule, it was applied correctly. After watching the replay a few times, its clear that he looses the puck as soon as he is whacked on his hand and that takes away a scoring chance.

    That said, the problem is the rule itself. It has been modified so much that there are so many penalty shots called, and a lot of the excitement surrounding them is gone. I would love to see them go back to the old days of the 70’s & 80’s where nothing less then clearly pulling the man down from behind would get you a penalty shot.

  10. sdfan91911 - May 29, 2013 at 5:11 PM

    We dont have an NHL team down here in San Diego but we go with the closest team which is the Kings (Winners of their game #7 yesterday!!) but still love game 7’s especially hockey!!! GO?!…Just want an exciting game tonight & then let the WCF begin!!

Top 10 NHL Player Searches
  1. P. Kessel (1617)
  2. P. Kane (1283)
  3. S. Matthias (1128)
  4. D. Carcillo (1048)
  5. C. Ehrhoff (1022)