Kukla's Korner

Abel to Yzerman

Quick Recap- Detroit Red Wings/Winnipeg Jets

Detroit played well for the first 10 minutes of period one, then the Jets scored a shorthanded goal with about 8 minutes left. The Wings were held without a shot after the goal.

The Wings played well for the first 17 minutes of the second period, even tying the game at 1-1, then.... Winnipeg scored 3 goals in 2 minutes late in the period to go up 4-1.

Wings lose 5-1.

Detroit goal and team stats below.

Losing streak hits 12 and and Winnipeg is in town Thursday.  Also, the last game of the season is at home against Tampa on April 4th.




Filed in: | Abel to Yzerman | Permalink


bigfrog's avatar

The last game of this dismal season is on April 4th at home against Tampa bay. shock

Posted by bigfrog on 12/11/19 at 12:01 AM ET

Paul's avatar

If anyone knows it’s you bf, thanks. My mind was wondering.

Posted by Paul from Motown Area on 12/11/19 at 12:04 AM ET

bigfrog's avatar

No problem Paul. cheese

Posted by bigfrog on 12/11/19 at 12:08 AM ET

ilovehomers's avatar

Good news: AA wasnt a minus this game!

Posted by ilovehomers on 12/11/19 at 12:11 AM ET

Primis's avatar

That first period SH goal WIN got was a load of crap and the truth is DET seemed deflated after that.  They had no business allowing that goal.  You can’t sit there and just jab and jab at a goalie.  Any other time they don’t allow that to stand.  For some reason against DET, they just always allow these things.  It’s frustrating and maddening.

Posted by Primis on 12/11/19 at 11:44 AM ET

hockeyfreak13's avatar

You can’t sit there and just jab and jab at a goalie

The ref said the puck was never frozen, if I’m not mistaken. Can anyone explain why? It sure looked covered to me.

Posted by hockeyfreak13 from Grand Rapids on 12/11/19 at 01:22 PM ET

Paul's avatar


via the Winnipeg Sun,

“Unless it’s obvious, the call on the ice stands,” Jets coach Paul Maurice said. “Had it been a trapper over top of the puck, I think that gets called back but it wasn’t sealed up. It was a blocker, you can’t truly cover that puck and it was loose. I would have been surprised if they had pulled that one back from us.”

Posted by Paul from Motown Area on 12/11/19 at 01:33 PM ET

hockeyfreak13's avatar

I don’t know about that one, Paul. Even if they deemed that the puck was loose, there seems to be contradicting rules at play here from 69.7 of the NHL rulebook.

In a rebound situation, or where a
goalkeeper and attacking player(s) are simultaneously attempting to
play a loose puck, whether inside or outside the crease, incidental contact with the goalkeeper will be permitted, and any goal that is
scored as a result thereof will be allowed

They seem to be using that language to allow the goal.

In the event that a goalkeeper has been pushed into the net
together with the puck by an attacking player after making a stop, the
goal will be disallowed

But doesn’t this rule also disallow it? Comrie’s blocker arm was pushed into the net with the puck.

Posted by hockeyfreak13 from Grand Rapids on 12/11/19 at 02:22 PM ET

Add a Comment

Please limit embedded image or media size to 575 pixels wide.

Add your own avatar by joining Kukla's Korner, or logging in and uploading one in your member control panel.

Captchas bug you? Join KK or log in and you won't have to bother.


Notify me of follow-up comments?


Most Recent Blog Posts

About Abel to Yzerman

Welcome to Abel to Yzerman, a Red Wing blog since 1977.  No other site on the internet has better-researched, fact-laden and better prepared discussions than A2Y.  Re-phrase: we do little research, find facts and stats highly overrated and claim little to no preparation.  There are 19 readers of A2Y. No more, no less. All of them, except maybe one, are juvenile in nature.  Reminding them of that in the comment section will only encourage them to prove that. Your suggestions and critiques are welcome: wphoulihan@gmail.com