In the Pens' crazy motherfucking
5-4 win over the Rangers last night, the refs had a huge say, calling a (perhaps) questionable interference penalty with under four minutes left in the third of a 4-4 game, leading to Malkin's eventual winner on the PP. You can see it on
TSN's video at about the 1:50 mark. The victim of the interference was Hockey Jesus himself. As you can imagine, the fine folks over over at
The Pensblog say simply "Martin Straka interfere(d) with Crosby trying to get it. Interference is a penalty." On the other hand, our old friends over at
Blueshirt Bulletin have a different take: "Did Straka interfere with Crosby? Possibly...with Gomez having swatted the puck off Marian Hossa's stick, neither team had possession, so it may have been Crosby interfering with Straka -- or more likely just two players battling for a loose puck. ... Crosby dove, so he got the call, a call that was not being made any other time in the game on behalf of any other player, let alone at such a critical juncture."
We asked the two blogs to sit down over tea to try to resolve their difference of opinion. The following is a transcript.
Pensblog: Good day to you, fine sir. A delight to be with you.
BB: Good day to you as well. May I begin by saying how lovely it is to sit down with you and converse in such a rational manner. Civilized discourse is the key to a harmonious society, especially in the blogosphere.
Pensblog: I tend to agree. If I may, to begin, you must acknowledge that Mr. Crosby was prevented from using his glorious rapidity to get to the puck, which by definition is, in fact, interference.
BB: While I have no quarrels with your definition, good sir, I do believe that is not the issue. The question was whether in fact it was poorly timed, with under 4 minutes to go in a 4-4 playoff contest.
Pensblog: I must respectfully disagree. Should not a penalty be a penalty whenever it occurs? It would seem ungentlemanly to change the rules throughout the course of a game, would it not?
BB: Well good sir, the art of refereeing is subjective at the best of times, there is no reason external factors cannot influence what should and should not be called.
Pensblog: No, my good man, it is not subjective, there is a definition of a penalty and it should be called the same regardless of the situation. That's pure objectivity.
BB: Bite me, dickwad.
*tm Pensblog.
