ECQF Game 5: Florida Panthers @ Toronto Maple Leafs | 7PM ET | TNT, CBC, SN, TVAS

[The Grim Reaper]

Matthews was on the grassy knoll.

 

[TheBeard]

The puck was over the line once he lifted his pad.

Puck shifted back into the net when he lifted his pad. You see it move backwards.

 

[dekelikekocur]

What do you think?

Those aren't the same time stamp. First photo his stick hand is a foot in front of his leg pad, in the second photo, it's against it.

 

[IceManCat]

GOAT. He was so insistent on authenticity he faked the moon landings by filming on the Moon.

Eyes Wide Shut was a message, not a movie..... So is every single commercial you just watched tonight. Good Luck buddy.

 

[Woodrow]

Sportsnet panel grasping at straws. Whistle or no whistle the play was clearly dead by the time Bobrovsky tries to stand up.

 

[kwichang]

Third period gonna be rocking

 

[JimmyApples]

For the most part yeah. I find Sportsnet and ESPN to be decent.

Sportsnet is brutal

 

[floridada]

TNT is doing a good job of breaking down the no goal call. Im sure sportsnet is being just as objective as they are.

 

[AcerComputer]

Whistle 100% blew. It's not even debatable, they showed the play with clear sound on TNT

While it was under his pad? lol

 

[Ratsreign]

The puck was over the line once he lifted his pad.

Which was after the play was dead

 

[MayonnaiseOreo]

tired of seeing the hipster gm

Hipster? Because he wears glasses?

 

[zeykshade]

That's no goal and Gelinas didn't score in 2004 either.

 

[Gil Gunderson]

Sounds just like the goal in Game 1 Toronto vs Tampa.

That one never had an angle with the puck crossing the line and yet it was called good goal.

They had an angle.

 

[Auston Marlander]

There are two angles that show it's maybe over and I'm not even sure of that. I honestly think there's like a 5% chance that the mad lad actually kept that shit a fraction over the line, and since you can't really prove otherwise.... no goal. Simple, clear, no conspiracy, no issue.

You want it to be over and I get that, but applying the benefit of the doubt I really don't know that I'm 100% sure just based on the angles I was given in the time the review took place.

That's not true, one replay clearly shows what part of the pad it's under and another clearly shows that part of the pad over the line. Doesn't matter since what anyone wants is irrelevant, it's no goal by the rules, and it's nice they are finally using the rules to make calls.

I'm not trying to convince you, or anyone, just stating what's been shown on TV.

 

[Tuggy]

What do you think?

That doesn't prove anything.

 

[Joeffice]

Panthers look ready to give up this game, leafs have to keep pressing

Toronto is finally carrying the play, dominating possession.

But...

Toronto's supposed stars are still not finishing on anything.

 

[Master P]

Lmao thats just egregious. The ref who blows that down has the perfect view of the puck.

That play was when I learned about "intent to blow the whistle" lmao.

 

[ijuka]

Those aren't the same time stamp. First photo his stick hand is a foot in front of his leg pad, in the second photo, it's against it.

Yeah but that doesn't matter, the puck's lodged in the same place regardless. It's constantly under the same spot under his pad. They're not really meant to be the same time stamp, the first photo's just supposed to show where the puck was.

 

[Nothingbutglass]

Panthers look ready to give up this game, leafs have to keep pressing

They do? They look like they are going to choke the Leafs out mercifully

 

[DistantThunderRep]

Yeah his pad's in the way. But to me, the part of the pad that the puck's under clearly is fully in the net. But yeah, can't call via inference, I guess.

The puck isn't fully showing white though. It has to completely cross the line and thats too close and no angle has it conclusively on the first shot and the interference push of the pad. So it has to be no goal.

 

[Channelcat]

No it didn't. Puck clearly hit the goalie's skate and went up under the pad. The one angle showed it drop down when he started to stand up and it hadn't gone over yet. Play was clearly dead.

Yup. Didn't go in until he lifts up. But was the play actually dead?

 

[Strangle]

Which was after the play was dead

But when exactly was the play dead?

 

[Auston Marlander]

The puck was over the line once he lifted his pad.

Ya but it wasn't shown over the line in a single camera angle before the whistle. It's no goal, even if it went it. Sucks we might lose by another goal taken back that actually went in.

 

[Ragamuffin Gunner]

What do you think?

The puck is to the left of the blocker in the 1st pic. The part of his pat to the left of his blocker was in front of the goal line in pic 2.

No goal.

 

[Chainshot]

GOAT. He was so insistent on authenticity he faked the moon landings by filming on the Moon.

I said that at a family gathering with my ex's uncle who is a denier. He couldn't figure out if he should agree or not.

Matthews was on the grassy knoll.

Couldn't have been. That would have required a shot.