Criteria to overturn a goal (Goalie Interference)

[The Crypto Guy]

Looked like a good goal to me.

 

[JFleegs]

Thought that one should have counted in the sense that the player didn't interfere on the goal, but precedent has shown that even minimal contact will result in a non-goal.

O boo-hoo. The entire lightning team throw a tantrum anytime things don't go their way which tells you how infrequently this happens to them.

it was tongue in cheek for tonight’s game

 

[More 2004]

If it's scored by tampa.. good chance it will be disallowed

 

[llamateizer]

Incidental contact within the crease and not forced is a no goal.

Duclair is clearly in the crease when the contact occurs.

This below Incidental contact occured outside the crease. It's a good goal

 

[PAZ]

Makes sense why they called it back. Duclair's skate is in the blue paint and hampered Bob's ability to cover the puck.

Plus there's the little extra danger of Bob's glove hand being close to Duclair's skate when he moves it. Pretty reckless skate movement by Duclair imo.

 

[SaintMorose]

I see Bobrovsky trying to cover the puck and Duclair's skate impeding that when it moved back into the crease, which also traps the glove for a moment.

This seems like pretty clear goaltender interference.

Duclair's skate goes for the puck as soon as that puck is loose in the crease, it's just as much Duclair's puck as it is Bob's, He doesn't need to wait for Bob to attempt to cover it before he is allowed to play it.

There's no trap of Bob's glove, even though they touch Bob never has his glove moving to make a save when Duclair's skate is there and never gets his skate edge into the ice so at no point is Bob impaired when trying to move to make a save (which is why the second gi is a good call as he is in the process of moving to the save when contacted).

 

[VaporTrail]

Neutral fan here. Looked like good goals to me.

 

[Bank Shot]

I see Bobrovsky trying to cover the puck and Duclair's skate impeding that when it moved back into the crease, which also traps the glove for a moment.

This seems like pretty clear goaltender interference.

He pretty clearly hooks Bobrovsky's glove with his leg.

Not to mention he's standing in the blue paint the entire time..

These should get called back 100% of the time.

 

[Zirakzigil]

I really late how ticky tacky this has become. Should only be called back if there is more than marginal contact. Brushing a goalies glove, arm, etc, should not overturn a goal. I especially hate how goals are called back when the goalie pushes forward, goes outside the crease and hits the opposing player. They have a right to be there.

 

[Bank Shot]

I really late how ticky tacky this has become. Should only be called back if there is more than marginal contact. Brushing a goalies glove, arm, etc, should not overturn a goal. I especially hate how goals are called back when the goalie pushes forward, goes outside the crease and hits the opposing player. They have a right to be there.

Yeah but what does that have to do with this goal?

At no point is Duclair outside the crease. The goalie has a right to push into someone when they are in the crease. If we don't allow that, then the players can just force the goalies onto the goal line every shot.

 

[Sergei Shirokov]

I think the standard is being dropped a little too low. Any fan would be outraged if both these calls happened against your team in an elimination game.

You could argue Bob was impeded from covering it on the 1st (unlikely he gets there, nvm Duclair being held) but he didn't have a chance on the 2nd one regardless.

And I say this as someone who's on the Florida bandwagon in the East.

 

[TMLife17]

That 2nd one was pretty questionable. I would've challenged too.

 

[Hennessy]

Goaltender Interference is such an arbitrary call. I have no idea what the standard is. What's deemed GI in one game will be allowed in the next.
I get why it can be a tough call. It's inherently open to subjective interpretation.
"Did that clipped skate impede his ability to make a save?"
"Was he pushed into the crease enough where he couldn't avoid contact?"
These are valid judgements that can't really be codified in black and white. But it makes every GI challenge a random adventure.

 

[TheNumber4]

The Bolts of all fanbases acting like the League is screwing them. That’s hilarious.

 

[Hoglander]

Duclair's skate is in the crease to start with. Bobrovsky makes a bit of contact as he attempts a save, then Duclair's skate comes back in the crease, making significant contact with Bobrovsky's glove as he tries to smother it, all the while nobody is forcing Duclair into the crease.

Maybe Bob doesn't get to that puck and it makes no difference, but maybe he would have. Looks like interference to me.

 

[Shocker]

That 2nd one was pretty questionable. I would've challenged too.

Idk, if he didn't try to spin i'd agree, but he does that and iniates a contact with Bob.

 

[OKR]

There's no trap of Bob's glove, even though they touch Bob never has his glove moving to make a save when Duclair's skate is there and never gets his skate edge into the ice so at no point is Bob impaired when trying to move to make a save (which is why the second gi is a good call as he is in the process of moving to the save when contacted).

Bobrovsky can’t occupy a space that is legally his due to Duclair standing there, that’s literally impairing Bobrovsky from moving to a position he needs to. The reason why Bobrovsky never has his glove moving to make a initial save is because he can’t, because Duclair’s positioning impairs him from doing so.

100% goalie interference.

 

[D Wakaluk]

50/50 but it does sooth my nerves it was against Tampa

 

[Chaos2k7]

I watched your video and saw it now you pointed it on your video feed from canada. Bally's didn't give me that replay angle.

It was clear as day on our Bally feed

 

[Catscountry40]

Man the TB whining last night is causing noise pollution on planet earth.

 

[Chaos2k7]

Makes sense why they called it back. Duclair's skate is in the blue paint and hampered Bob's ability to cover the puck.

Plus there's the little extra danger of Bob's glove hand being close to Duclair's skate when he moves it. Pretty reckless skate movement by Duclair imo.

Duclair literally makes a circle around Bob's glove with his right leg and pulls the glove hand to the left as he tries to cover the puck up in the crease and the result is the puck squirted loose.

Clear as day.

 

[ShootIt]

I thought for sure the first one was going to be overruled as Dukes second motion impedes Bob's left arm from getting back into position.
He was in the crease.

The 2nd one I was surprised at how fast the refs blew it no goal as it happened. This one to me was way closer and IMO if the refs called it a good goal when it happened it could of stayed a good goal. On the replay the Tampa player isn't pushed into Bob, which I guess is what kept it a no goal .

If the 2nd one was called back on my team I could definitely get the frustration.

 

[Chaos2k7]

I thought for sure the first one was going to be overruled as Dukes second motion impedes Bob's left arm from getting back into position.
He was in the crease.

The 2nd one I was surprised at how fast the refs blew it no goal as it happened. This one to me was way closer and IMO if the refs called it a good goal when it happened it could of stayed a good goal. On the replay the Tampa player isn't pushed into Bob, which I guess is what kept it a no goal .

If the 2nd one was called back on my team I could definitely get the frustration.

Second one was helped by it being called no goal on the ice, but again the player kicked Bob's right leg, in the crease, little tricky tacky maybe but there was no clear evidence to overturn the on ice ruling of no goal.

The referee called the play no goal right away.

 

[Score8]

Easy solution, the only thing that can be reviewed on goal calls is the puck crossed the line completely or above cross bar, everything else is non reviewable.

 

[Summer Rose]

I can see the argument for goaltender interference on both disallowed goals, if I'm being honest, and I'm a Bolts fan. Also, in the bigger picture, those calls weren't the reason we lost the game, or the series.