GDT: Canada vs USA

[Tobias Kahun]

The dude isnt completely wrong.
There’s this game for one. Also the gold medal game when TSN’s camera magically prevented a delay of game in the dying minutes if the gold medal game.
And that screw job of the USA at the Ivan Hlinka when Canada tied it after time expired. All of these are very recent.
This is just off the top of my head and I dont follow junior hockey too closely. Wouldn't be supposed if there were many more.

What about when the Canadian womens team nearly got cheated in 02 at the olympics?

I love how they're always labeled the second best country in hockey (mostly by North Americans) even if there's nothing to show for it.

They’re definitely a top 3 North American team, don’t know about the world

 

[umma gumma]

How do you expect people to take you seriously?

I don’t care if it’s iihf, that first call was inexcusably awful. In no way does Jackson ever actually impede the goalies progress in front of the net. Saying that “maybe his skate stopped him from pushing out his pad” is a joke. There was absolutely nothing blatant about it and it’s disingenuous to paint it as such.

And now people are really gonna turn around and claim poor sportsmanship lololololol? I don’t even care about the second call, the first one was so obviously not goalie inference, and it changed the dynamic of the game from being tied again to giving canada a considerable momentum advantage. And if we’re being honest then you know that goal wouldn’t be ruled goaltender interference in either USA hockey or Hockey canada.

Get over it, you had a call go massively in your favor when it probably shouldn’t have because of an archaic in the crease rule and to your credit you were able to capitalize off of it. Congrats, enjoy it, embrace it, but don’t act like it didn’t happen, and definitely don’t be upset that other fans aren’t happy about it.

It doesn't have to be blantant. The goalie's pad, which was in the blue paint, came to a dead stop because an opponents leg was in the way. Had the leg not been there to stop the push, he makes the save. If it happened outside the crease its a good goal. IIHF are pretty strict when it comes to the crease. They used to blow the play dead anytime a player stepped foot in it.

 

[TheBeastCoast]

It doesn't have to be blantant. The goalie's pad, which was in the blue paint, came to a dead stop because an opponents leg was in the way. Had his leg not been there to stop the push, he makes the save. If it happened outside the crease its a good goal. IIHF are pretty strict when it comes to the crease. They used to blow the play dead anytime a player stepped foot in it.

They are still supposed to if you go in without the puck. You are only allowed in the blue paint in IIHF to get to the puck...and you can't imped the goalie while you are in there. There have been a few crease violations throughout the tournament.

 

[Boss Man Hughes]

How do you expect people to take you seriously?

I don’t care if it’s iihf, that first call was inexcusably awful. In no way does Jackson ever actually impede the goalies progress in front of the net. Saying that “maybe his skate stopped him from pushing out his pad” is a joke. There was absolutely nothing blatant about it and it’s disingenuous to paint it as such.

And now people are really gonna turn around and claim poor sportsmanship lololololol? I don’t even care about the second call, the first one was so obviously not goalie inference, and it changed the dynamic of the game from being tied again to giving canada a considerable momentum advantage. And if we’re being honest then you know that goal wouldn’t be ruled goaltender interference in either USA hockey or Hockey canada.

Get over it, you had a call go massively in your favor when it probably shouldn’t have because of an archaic in the crease rule and to your credit you were able to capitalize off of it. Congrats, enjoy it, embrace it, but don’t act like it didn’t happen, and definitely don’t be upset that other fans aren’t happy about it.

It was obvious goalie interference for anyone who isn't blind. He is standing in the crease preventing the goalie form getting to the puck. Even if it wasn't the correct call by IIHF rules it should have been disallowed in any league.

How do you expect people to take you seriously?

I don’t care if it’s iihf, that first call was inexcusably awful. In no way does Jackson ever actually impede the goalies progress in front of the net. Saying that “maybe his skate stopped him from pushing out his pad” is a joke. There was absolutely nothing blatant about it and it’s disingenuous to paint it as such.

And now people are really gonna turn around and claim poor sportsmanship lololololol? I don’t even care about the second call, the first one was so obviously not goalie inference, and it changed the dynamic of the game from being tied again to giving canada a considerable momentum advantage. And if we’re being honest then you know that goal wouldn’t be ruled goaltender interference in either USA hockey or Hockey canada.

Get over it, you had a call go massively in your favor when it probably shouldn’t have because of an archaic in the crease rule and to your credit you were able to capitalize off of it. Congrats, enjoy it, embrace it, but don’t act like it didn’t happen, and definitely don’t be upset that other fans aren’t happy about it.

It was obvious goalie interference for anyone who isn't blind. He is standing in the crease preventing the goalie form getting to the puck. Even if it wasn't the correct call by IIHF rules it should have been disallowed in any league.

 

[67 others]

It doesn't have to be blantant. The goalie's pad, which was in the blue paint, came to a dead stop because an opponents leg was in the way. Had the leg not been there to stop the push, he makes the save. If it happened outside the crease its a good goal. IIHF are pretty strict when it comes to the crease. They used to blow the play dead anytime a player stepped foot in it.

This.

Its amazing we say it 100 times and folks still act like it was a good goal.

it was as blatant and obvious as if he tied the goalies leg to the other post to prevent him from sliding over.

its called every time in IIHF

 

[Chelios]

As for other standouts, I’ve been critical of Brandt Clarke this tournament. In fact I think he’s been hot garbage. He stepped up huge tonight though. What a game from him. Gut check time and he was our best D

Wait... what?

 

[Bob P]

Both calls were so close they could've gone either way. But the point is that Canada was, again, the beneficiary.

It likely wouldn't have been a big issue if a history of home cooking did not exist.
I’m guessing many of the Americans are tired of this. It’s accumulative. It all adds up over time.
And the Hlinka isnt some random tournament. It’s arguably the second best junior tourney nowadays. That screw job of the USA that year was flat out outrageous.

There wasn't video review. Oh well.

 

[Voight]

I mean my personal opinion on the first goalie interference was that it should have counted. But Bob had a pretty in depth explanation of the call and why it was the correct one based off the IIHF rules. Basically because he was in the blue paint and the puck was not and he impeded the goalie making an attempt on the puck inside the blue paint that is goalie interference in International hockey. I can also admit I would be pissed off if I was on the other end of it...but it does seem to be the correct interpretation of the rules.

Yea, while I thought the 1st was a good call had it gone the other way I would've understood why.

The second one was not going to count in any universe.

 

[Qwijibo]

How do you expect people to take you seriously?

I don’t care if it’s iihf, that first call was inexcusably awful. In no way does Jackson ever actually impede the goalies progress in front of the net. Saying that “maybe his skate stopped him from pushing out his pad” is a joke. There was absolutely nothing blatant about it and it’s disingenuous to paint it as such.

And now people are really gonna turn around and claim poor sportsmanship lololololol? I don’t even care about the second call, the first one was so obviously not goalie inference, and it changed the dynamic of the game from being tied again to giving canada a considerable momentum advantage. And if we’re being honest then you know that goal wouldn’t be ruled goaltender interference in either USA hockey or Hockey canada.

Get over it, you had a call go massively in your favor when it probably shouldn’t have because of an archaic in the crease rule and to your credit you were able to capitalize off of it. Congrats, enjoy it, embrace it, but don’t act like it didn’t happen, and definitely don’t be upset that other fans aren’t happy about it.

The problem here is that you’re applying NHL standards to an IIHL game. Different rules, different standards. By the IIHF standard it was textbook goalie interference. It’s ok to be upset about it. Especially looking at it through the lens of the nhl thst you’re used to. But it was the correct call

 

[67 others]

Yea, while I thought the 1st was a good call had it gone the other way I would've understood why.

The second one was not going to count in any universe.

Sure it was. Williams pitchforked Stalock into the net in the 2014 playoffs lol

 

[Sensin5]

First call was terrible- US got hosed. Second call was blatant goalie interference and refs made the correct call.

Bad refereeing has been a main staple in the iihf. Canada historically got the raw end of iihf calls. The 5 min major on Desn in the opening Czech gsme is sn example.

6-2 (or 6-3) still is a significant win. Better team won despite poor refereeing.

Agreed on all except last point - the team with the better goalie won. US team outplaying Canada in almost every way (other than finishing) but stellar goaltending won it for us.

 

[BLNY]

I think it's funny that in a game with no Canadian officials, in a tournament run by the IIHF, that Canada got homer calls.

 

[Zegs2sendhelp]

Team Canada celebrating in locker room after beating USA

 

[MXD]

View attachment 630670

Team Canada celebrating in locker room after beating USA

... HHAHAHHHAHAAHHA YOU'RE STILL CRYING.

 

[KrisLetAngry]

Nothing on HF surprises me any more, but both of the goaltender interference calls were correct. The first one was a textbook box out by the American player, inside the crease. You can’t box out the other team’s goalie inside his crease. 2nd was a stick jammed into the pads and pushing, again inside the crease.

The NHL makes wacky goalie interference calls all the time, but both of these were textbook calls and I was glad to see them correctly called. First one would be fine in the white paint, 2nd should never be allowed.

Yea. It really sucks seeing 2 goals get taken away against a team however we have rules.

If these rules didn't exist how many extra goals would be scored on goalies instantly?

It would be interference on goalies as soon as you can enter the zone.

 

[57special]

Canada looked terrible in the 1st. Just one of those games where they couldn't complete a pass, cover a man, or do anything right. USA looked very solid, and dangerous. Bedard scoring just before the period break was huge for CAN, who looked.... bad.

After that, the rest of TC finally showed up. Fantilli played his best game. Wright, to me, played a solid defensive game. Still not crazy about some of the Dmen, and i thought TC was very lucky that they didn't have one of those international refs that calls everything, as they seemed determined to hit the US at every attempt, and IMO, were very near to crossing the line with late hits.

The interference calls were both correct. The reffing, in general, was pretty good, especially compared to some of the abominations I have seen over the years.

I can't blame the US goalie, but clearly, after letting in a so-so 1st goal, Milic was the best player on either team.

 

[Qwijibo]

View attachment 630670

Team Canada celebrating in locker room after beating USA

 

[behemolari]

Just watching the game first time and I have not read the thread at all, I have absolutely no idea about discussion here.. so..

3-3 challenge was ridiculous homerism, blasphemy, rigged call 100% and I have no respect for the tournament or winner after seen that, goodbye

 

[jfrank21]

How do you expect people to take you seriously?

I don’t care if it’s iihf, that first call was inexcusably awful. In no way does Jackson ever actually impede the goalies progress in front of the net. Saying that “maybe his skate stopped him from pushing out his pad” is a joke. There was absolutely nothing blatant about it and it’s disingenuous to paint it as such.

And now people are really gonna turn around and claim poor sportsmanship lololololol? I don’t even care about the second call, the first one was so obviously not goalie inference, and it changed the dynamic of the game from being tied again to giving canada a considerable momentum advantage. And if we’re being honest then you know that goal wouldn’t be ruled goaltender interference in either USA hockey or Hockey canada.

Get over it, you had a call go massively in your favor when it probably shouldn’t have because of an archaic in the crease rule and to your credit you were able to capitalize off of it. Congrats, enjoy it, embrace it, but don’t act like it didn’t happen, and definitely don’t be upset that other fans aren’t happy about it.

Bravo, you put my thoughts to page perfectly. I was obviously more annoyed last night and half a bottle of bourbon in....regardless, its always amusing to read these boards after something controversial helps Canada.

"You just dont know the game bud! Its aboot playing the right way! Taking your man, being hard to play against! Winning the puck battles! Playing until the whistle!......Just dont do it against us! That's clearly a penalty!"

 

[LatteLarrys]

"You just dont know the game bud! Its aboot playing the right way! Taking your man, being hard to play against! Winning the puck battles! Playing until the whistle!......Just dont do it against us! That's clearly a penalty!"

Cool, a straw man as textbook as the two calls themselves. GG.

 

[Putt Pirate]

My only complaint about this tourney is every other year it is in Canada. Need other countries to step it up on that front but having home games 1/2 the tourneys vs. rarely....Canada should be winning most of these with their roster.

 

[dwdl21]

Just watching the game first time and I have not read the thread at all, I have absolutely no idea about discussion here.. so..

3-3 challenge was ridiculous homerism, blasphemy, rigged call 100% and I have no respect for the tournament or winner after seen that, goodbye

Seeya

 

[JackSlater]

I think it's funny that in a game with no Canadian officials, in a tournament run by the IIHF, that Canada got homer calls.

There are always some good ones. The non-Canadian refs applied the IIHF rulebook to rig things for Canada. The first called off goal would be frustrating as a fan but IIHF rules are always frustrating. The goal would have counted in the NHL but this was not the NHL and according to the IIHF's rules that goal was not good. The second goal should have been disallowed on the ice it was so blatant, but I suppose the Canadian European refs wanted to hide their true intentions by calling it a goal and making Canada challenge it first. We also have references to Canada's conspiracy to place TSN's camera in just the right spot to prevent a delay of game penalty in 2020, plus the foresight to make an IIHF rule that pertains to that situation beforehand. Of course it was home cooking for Canada though, it was in... the Czech Republic after all. Canada also conspiring to bring in a fresh Owen Beck this tournament was also dastardly.

My favourite from the summer tournament was a guy claiming that TSN was scheduling commercial breaks to give Canada a rest at opportune times and not just following the specifically outlined guidelines for commercial breaks in the IIHF rulebook. Who knows what evil scheme Canada will have for tonight.

 

[CantHaveTkachev]

My only complaint about this tourney is every other year it is in Canada. Need other countries to step it up on that front but having home games 1/2 the tourneys vs. rarely....Canada should be winning most of these with their roster.

because it's a huge money maker for the IIHF and they can charge outrageous prices for games here...they are greedy

heck, when it's in the US more than half of the crowd is Canadian as well

 

[Putt Pirate]

because it's a huge money maker for the IIHF and they can charge outrageous prices for games here...they are greedy

heck, when it's in the US more than half of the crowd is Canadian as well

When they had it in Tampa I believe....nobody came from anywhere. Minny, DTW, Boston, Colorado, NYC, even Seattle would be fun. Just gets old seeing it in Canada yet again....I lost interest to be honest when I saw it being held there again in 2025. Give it a f***ing break.

But then, I cannot watch it ion Youtube TV either as they do not carry NHL Network. I am yelling at clouds now too.