There isn't a frame that shows contact made within the crease. Because there wasn't contact in the crease.
This semi-principle is so weird - like the video review is supposed to correct possible ref mistakes, not to justify almost any decision.That's a goal but with it being a season ender + the call originally being no goal, it wasn't gonna get reversed.
Well if the league doesn't want people to feel like the league is rigged maybe they shouldn't have the refs make decisions that consistently make it look rigged. Thought of that?Regardless of what you think, idiots like Biz making asinine comments about the refs having money on draft kings thus giving the idiot tin foil hat conspiracy theorists desperate to feel like the league has it out for them (for whatever reason) more fuel for them dumbass need to be victims should be smarter. I got a friend who isn’t much of a hockey fan but for some reason apparently knows everything about hockey and is now convinced the league is rigged (like every league) and the refs have it out for them. It’s f***ing dumb and lazy and I feel bad for the dunbasses who truly feel every poor or even iffy call is a direct call from the league.
I’m arguing with another moron on twitter who’s convinced the league made the call because they want the revenue from game 7. Yeah, they’re gonna do something so egregious and controversial just to make a couple million from another game. Like, be smarter for once in your life.
If the call on the ice were "good goal", then it would be overturned by the video refs because of goalie interference.This semi-principle is so weird - like the video review is supposed to correct possible ref mistakes, not to justify almost any decision.
Why are you the way that you are?Dallas got away with a steal there imo
Should have been a coach's challenge that gets rejected, and a game loss on the PK
Lucky refs were on their side
Buddy, you keep arguing a losing case and are actually hurting your own argument.Here are two frames. Both frames show that the Avs player did not make the contact with the Stars player yet. Both shows that the Stars player already made the contact with the goalie. The difference between 1st frame and 2nd frame shows how much the Avs goalie was pushed back by the Stars player (it is clear if you look at the goalie's top foot location on both frames).
View attachment 872817
View attachment 872818
This...............didn't age well....Gary Bettman unequivocally wants the Colorado Avalanche to win the Stanley Cup
it's shameful at this point
lol exactly.Pretty obvious goal. Makar pushes him into the goalie.
Well if the league doesn't want people to feel like the league is rigged maybe they shouldn't have the refs make decisions that consistently make it look rigged. Thought of that?
The real time game stuff, you can see how it has to be reviewed. I can give the refs on those calls some understanding.Is it too naive to hope that league would change goalie interference rule, asking as a fan
Makar pushed him in though.I'm not seeing the controversy here. Reading the rule in the NHL rule book for 23-24, the Dallas player makes incidental contact with Georgiev's head while Georgiev is in his crease. At the top of it, but still in it. He wasn't forced in by the Avs defender. It's enough to make Georgiev adjust his position. A goal results. The Dallas player doesn't have to hit Georgiev with force. Just make contact. Argue the rule if you want, but I think the rule was correctly applied.
Right elbow makes contact with head before that push.Makar pushed him in. Should have been a goal. It's no contest.
Makar pushed him in though.