--- "Robert H. Gross" wrote:
Sorry to disagree with you but...  The whistle clearly blew BEFORE the puck
came out from between Baker's legs. I sit at that end of the rink and saw (and
heard) exactly what happend. A shot was taken, Baker APPARENTLY made the save,
the whistle blew, and then the puck trickled through Baker's legs into the
goal.
 
I agree that the whistle was blow too soon, but nonetheless it blew BEFORE the
goal. My tape from Sportschannel seems to indicate the scenario I mantioned
above.
--- end of quoted material ---
 
While I appreciate Ken's post, I have to agree with Bob on this one; I cover
the games for our campus paper and everyone in the press box, where I was
sitting, agreed that the whistle had blown.
I haven't seen the sportchannel tape, but my memory of what happened is quite
clear.
 
 
As a sidenote, I've been at many a game where a goal has been nullified because
of a whistle.
The ref blowing the whistle in hockey, I feel, is sort of like in football when
the refs miss the play so they say "the inadvertent whistle" was blown.  It's a
cop out in football and it's a cop out in hockey.
 
I always took the whistle blow as the "be all, end all"
The fact that the puck happened to go in doesn't nullify the fact that the
whistle had blown, and this should have made the goal void.
 
Jeff Beyer '98
Dartmouth College