Prospect Info: Caps Top Prospects General Discussion Thread Vol. 2 - 2021-22

[Ridley Simon]

It’s a pretty remarkable advantage for one country, to be able to host a global “tournament”, over and over and over.

Let’s allow Alabama to host every important CFB game they play.

Same shit. Different day.

 

[um]

That goaltender interference against the US was such a horrible call.

I don't know, he hit the goalie in the crease. Just cause you have the puck doesn't mean you can do that.

Although I admit I wasn't sure how that one was gonna be called.

 

[CapitalsCupReality]

It’s a pretty remarkable advantage for one country, to be able to host a global “tournament”, over and over and over.

Let’s allow Alabama to host every important CFB game they play.

Same shit. Different day.

Does anyone else buy these tickets like Canadians?

 

[usiel]

Chelsey not playing doomed USA team.

 

[pman25]

It’s a pretty remarkable advantage for one country, to be able to host a global “tournament”, over and over and over.

Tournament doesn’t likely survive without Canada. They love the WJC. So they get it for two years straight and then they throw a bone to Europe or just put it in Buffalo lol

 

[marcel snapshot]

What is the standard for video reversal on IIHF? Seems like it’s not “no reasonable ref could have made the call on the ice” but more like, “meh, looking at the video it’s 51-49 I would have called it differently”.

 

[AlexModvechkin8]

I don't know, he hit the goalie in the crease. Just cause you have the puck doesn't mean you can do that.

Although I admit I wasn't sure how that one was gonna be called.

His skate touched the goalies pad as he was turning. There was barely any contact and it didn’t prevent him from sliding across the crease. The goalie wasn’t moving when it happened and would have been beaten without the slight touch of the skate. Plus, the overhead view clearly showed Canada’s defenseman extending his arms and shoving the US player further into the crease which initiated the contact. It was an awful call.

 

[um]

His skate touched the goalies pad as he was turning. There was barely any contact and it didn’t prevent him from sliding across the crease. The goalie wasn’t moving when it happened and would have been beaten without the slight touch of the skate. Plus, the overhead view clearly showed Canada’s defenseman extending his arms and shoving the US player further into the crease which initiated the contact. It was an awful call.

his whole ass/back was in the goalies face.

 

[AlexModvechkin8]

his whole ass/back was in the goalies face.

He barely touches him, and he does it because #3 from Canada pushes him into him. None of his own momentum brought him into contact with the goalie. It’s as bad a call as I’ve ever seen at any level. There’s no way anyone who has played hockey at a competitive level thinks this is goaltender interference. The contact was non self-initiated and he has a right to be in the blue ice if the puck is in the crease.

 

[HTFN]

He barely touches him, and he does it because #3 from Canada pushes him into him. None of his own momentum brought him into contact with the goalie. It’s as bad a call as I’ve ever seen at any level. There’s no way anyone who has played hockey at a competitive level thinks this is goaltender interference. The contact was non self-initiated and he has a right to be in the blue ice if the puck is in the crease.

hmm, that's a pretty bad call

 

[um]

He barely touches him, and he does it because #3 from Canada pushes him into him. None of his own momentum brought him into contact with the goalie. It’s as bad a call as I’ve ever seen at any level. There’s no way anyone who has played hockey at a competitive level thinks this is goaltender interference. The contact was non self-initiated and he has a right to be in the blue ice if the puck is in the crease.

You said it yourself, he barely touches him, but he did touch him.

And I don't think the Dman really pushed him either, Blake was just stepping over to get into position to wrap the puck into the net... which was an awesome move on his part.

I do think it should have been a goal, but this is how goalie interference is called these days.

 

[AlexModvechkin8]

you said it yourself, he barely touches him, but he did touch him.

I do think it should have been a goal, but this is how goalie interference is called these days.

He touched him because he was pushed into him. That by definition is not goaltender interference. The contact has to be self-initiated and it has to impede the goalie from making the save. Neither of those criteria are definitively established here so calling it goaltender interference at all, let alone overturning the call on the ice of a good goal, is ridiculous.

As you said, nobody knows what goaltender interference is which is a big problem, but this sure isn’t it. It was potentially a game and tournament changing call to boot, and they overturned the call on the ice without clear evidence that the officials made an error. Pretty tough.

 

[um]

He touched him because he was pushed into him. That by definition is not goaltender interference. The contact has to be self-initiated and it has to impede the goalie from making the save. Neither of those criteria are definitively established here so calling it goaltender interference at all, let alone overturning the call on the ice of a good goal, is ridiculous.

As you said, nobody knows what goaltender interference is which is a big problem, but this sure isn’t it. It was potentially a game and tournament changing call to boot, and they overturned the call on the ice without clear evidence that the officials made an error. Pretty tough.

I don't see him being pushed into the goalie at all. He moves his right leg so he can make the move he's about to make.

I guess that's where we see it different.

 

[CapitalsCupReality]

He barely touches him, and he does it because #3 from Canada pushes him into him. None of his own momentum brought him into contact with the goalie. It’s as bad a call as I’ve ever seen at any level. There’s no way anyone who has played hockey at a competitive level thinks this is goaltender interference. The contact was non self-initiated and he has a right to be in the blue ice if the puck is in the crease.

That’s a bad call, although the “push” from the D was nothing.

The goalie contact was inconsequential.

 

[AlexModvechkin8]

I don't see him being pushed into the goalie at all. He moves his right leg so he can make the move he's about to make.

I guess that's where we see it different.

How do you look at 0:40 of the video and not see the defenseman extending his arms into the side/back of #9? That’s a push. It’s that push that initiates contact. He also has the puck and is allowed to claim his own ice to make a play.

 

[um]

How do you look at 0:40 of the video and not see the defenseman extending his arms into the side/back of #9? That’s a push. It’s that push that initiates contact. He also has the puck and is allowed to claim his own ice to make a play.

View attachment 630685

I see the push, but thats not why Blake suddenly sprung out his leg to make the wrap around move.

It seems like Blake absorbs the push no problem, and then makes his move.

 

[CapitalsCupReality]

How do you look at 0:40 of the video and not see the defenseman extending his arms into the side/back of #9? That’s a push. It’s that push that initiates contact. He also has the puck and is allowed to claim his own ice to make a play.

View attachment 630685

I think the goalie moving back to try and center himself in goal was equally responsible for that contact happening.

 

[AlexModvechkin8]

I see the push, but thats not why Blake suddenly sprung out his leg to make the wrap around move.

It seems like Blake absorbs the push no problem, and then makes his move.

You said the contact was his ass/back to the head, no? And again, he’s allowed to turn in the crease with the puck.

We’re not going to agree here. I was a licensed USAH official for a number of years and this was as bad a call as I’ve seen, in my opinion (which is worth nothing). There was nothing there, and there was certainly nothing definitive shown that the call on the ice should have been overturned. If you’re going to call something that soft then you might as well bring back the rule where guys can’t be in the crease at all. Side note: that would be a terrible idea.

 

[Ridley Simon]

I will say it. Had that been USA up 3-2 and the Nucks tying the game — does it called back?

I highly doubt it.

 

[um]

You said the contact was his ass/back to the head, no? And again, he’s allowed to turn in the crease with the puck.

We’re not going to agree here. I was a licensed USAH official for a number of years and this was as bad a call as I’ve seen, in my opinion (which is worth nothing). There was nothing there, and there was certainly nothing definitive shown that the call on the ice should have been overturned. If you’re going to call something that soft then you might as well bring back the rule where guys can’t be in the crease at all. Side note: that would be a terrible idea.

Are you allowed to make contact with the goalie in the crease just because you have the puck?

I got no problem with someone not liking the call, as I said I think it should be a goal. But I don’t think it’s so egregious based on how they’ve called goalie interference the last 5 or so years.

I think the refs followed an already established precedent here.

I will say it. Had that been USA up 3-2 and the Nucks tying the game — does it called back?

I highly doubt it.

What is your evidence for this?

I get not liking the call but this seems a little much.

 

[marcel snapshot]

I think the goalie moving back to try and center himself in goal was equally responsible for that contact happening.

Right - the contact was caused by the goalie moving into a U.S. player who had the puck - which had been lying free in the crease before he acquired it - on his stick. Is the U.S. player supposed to take 2 steps back to accommodate the goalie's anticipated move across the crease in order for the goal to be legal? It's a terrible call, and it's interesting that Mike Johnson (who's a pretty straight-shooter) immediately recognized that it should not be ruled GI

 

[CapitalsCupReality]

I will say it. Had that been USA up 3-2 and the Nucks tying the game — does it called back?

I highly doubt it.

It’s a judgement call, so who knows, but not worthy of the insinuations.

 

[Ridley Simon]

Are you allowed to make contact with the goalie in the crease just because you have the puck?

I got no problem with someone not liking the call, as I said I think it should be a goal. But I don’t think it’s so egregious based on how they’ve called goalie interference the last 5 or so years.

I think the refs followed an already established precedent here.


What is your evidence for this?

I get not liking the call but this seems a little much.

No evidence. Just stating my opinion, and what I’ve seen happen over the years. We will never know, but home cooking is home cooking.

It’s a judgement call, so who knows, but not worthy of the insinuations.

To each their own.

 

[DWGie26]

Had our chances. didn’t win.

I don’t know… i am old. I believe in winning. Can’t blame all of the other stuff.

 

[AlexModvechkin8]