Catscountry40
Registered User
- Feb 4, 2021
- 351
- 505
Goaltender interference is like a catch in the NFL. No one knows what one is.
Worked for him in the Lightning series. Dudes a flopper.Bobo dropping his stick to try and draw a call there too.
Good questionDo you think they use DOPS coin or do they have their own?
I'm the farthest thing from a Boston fan. My stance is the first call Florida scored shouldn't have been ruled a good goal, but this McAvoy shot should indeed have counted.
It's a weird area; I can't recall any goals off my head where Team A crosschecks a player from Team B into the goalie of Team B.
That’s pretty much how I see it. One goalie had a chance to make a save, the other clearly did notPossibly, but I think the goaltender interference was clearer on the Bennett goal with the player being pushed into his own goalie. The slight foot contact in the McAvoy goal didn't seem to be enough to prevent the goalie from being able to make a save.
Bennett goal should have been called back, imo. McAvoy goal could have gone either way.
In the end, hockey, like life, is sometimes kinda iffy.
The boys in the Toronto room didn’t want to be responsible forThe Panthers goal was more of a judgement call, but the Bruins goal was clearly interference. All I could think is they were focused on the stick, and didn't notice Bob's skate pushed back.
Or.........
Ref: Hey NY, was this interference
NY: Yeah, but we need to extend the series for $$$$$$$$$
I need a better replay to see how did Bob lose his stick on this play. I kind of feel like if you let the Panthers goal stand then you let this one stand as well.
My initial thought was the Bennet goal shouldn't have counted, and the McAvoy one should have, but after further thought, I agree with you. Here's why fwiw.Both the Bennett goal and the McAvoy goal should not have counted.
My initial thought was the Bennet goal shouldn't have counted, and the McAvoy one should have, but after further thought, I agree with you. Here's why fwiw.
About the Bennet goal - I think (i) Bennett interfered (simply put) with Coyle and the goalie by consequence, and (ii) that decreased the goaltender's opportunity to make a save. The case is clear cut because not only should it have been a penalty, but it totally eliminated the opportunity to attempt a save.
About the McAvoy goal - It's less clear cut, but yeah, goalie interference.
I think Bobrovsky's opportunity was impeded, but not completely prevented. He was out of position to the left of his angle, recovered back to the right, and McAvoy shot where Bobrovsky recovered from. But he was off angle in part because Heinen was in the wrong place.
Here's what I mean: Heinen didn't commit an interference penalty, but he tried to squeeze through Ekman-Larsson's legal boxout to get position, and ended up between OEL and Bob without any space he earned. If one looks at 5:06-5:08 of the video on the first page, you can see what I mean.
The way I see it, whenever a player tries to do that & makes contact with the goalie imo their team should likely lose the call. Because, to me, it's about the fundamentals of getting & maintaining position. From that pov, Heinen is in the wrong.
But I also know the way I think about has no discernible relation to what the league thinks.
IMHO, sports crossed the Rubicon into entertainment long ago when players began to be paid to perform.I'm fairly convinced the NHL is barely a half-step up from the WWE.
It's entertainment, not sport.
We need props, maybe some folding chairs and tables at the benchesI'm fairly convinced the NHL is barely a half-step up from the WWE.
It's entertainment, not sport.
Well we're already responsible for Toronto being burned down once this postseasonThe boys in the Toronto room didn’t want to be responsible for
the “Great Boston Fire”.
“And then they’ll come for us!”
Apples and oranges.Did they do the ol’ “two wrongs make a right” thing?
idk if you're a coach, but imo this illustrates how coaches, and officials think differently. coaches think the rules ought to reward good technique, but officials don't really care. if the goalie is off line due to movement, that's the offense doing their job! if the goalie is off angle because a guy squeezes through a boxout, that's kinda cheap.But in this play hes not in the position he wants to be in, hes in the position hes able to be in after contact in the crease.
Yeah they know the GM would lead the way with more "We’re not in a position to be criticizing the officials and league-wide such. That's standard protocol. We’ll get fined as a result of that, so there’s no intention on my point to be critical" ranting.The boys in the Toronto room didn’t want to be responsible for
the “Great Boston Fire”.
“And then they’ll come for us!”
If that's the rule, that's stupid. OEL has a right to be there, and Heinen doesn't. Crashing/slipping boxouts towards goalies... I don't like it. I guess the only alternative is to pound forwards who do it.Difference between the two, the florida D-man bumped Heinen into the goalie
Who said anything about what the GM would do? I meant fans like you rampagingYeah they know the GM would lead the way with more "We’re not in a position to be criticizing the officials and league-wide such. That's standard protocol. We’ll get fined as a result of that, so there’s no intention on my point to be critical" ranting.
You will if you lose.Wait... Are we now supposed to moan and cry about it for a week?