GDT: Game 14: New York Rangers vs Columbus Blue Jackets, 7pm ET, MSG

[SnowblindNYR]

That was the biggest impediment to me following football. Seems so unintuitive that penalties are sometimes worth declining, what the yardage penalties are, and whether downs are reset and whether they come with yardage.

I don't have a problem with that is that they made the rules almost unenforceable because literally everything can be a penalty particularly when a QB is hit. Literally by the rule of the law, any sack can be a penalty.

 

[2Leetch_94]

There was none. Not until Kakko jammed it in, and I'm guessing the refs were saying they intended to blow the whistle before that.

My favorite. Intent to blow the whistle. Unless Lundqvist is in the crease, then there's never any intent to blow the whistle ever.

 

[LiveLongandProspal]

Vally is right. The Rangers really never ever get calls, even obvious ones.

 

[SnowblindNYR]

There was none. Not until Kakko jammed it in, and I'm guessing the refs were saying they intended to blow the whistle before that.

Only league in the world where "intent" by refs is a thing. The Rangers intended to score we should get a goal for that.

 

[CasusBelli]

How the f*** can refs tell it was frozen? Honest question? WTF, it's impossible to tell that from any angle.

The puck was resting on the ice, inside the goal. We don’t see the ref even try to blow his whistle until seconds later. It’s rubbish.

Unless “intent” means “forgot a whistle needs to be blown, but it shouldn’t have been blown anyway, because the puck cleanly went in before the goaltender had control of it.”

 

[Breaded Fox]

Article from.... 7 years ago..

 

[Jauffre]

Put native 4K + high refresh-rate cameras in each net's crossbar and posts. We have the tech.

 

[Brutananadilewski]

My favorite. Intent to blow the whistle. Unless Lundqvist is in the crease, then there's never any intent to blow the whistle ever.

The worst was the one where the ref was raising his hand to blow the whistle, only to then signal a goal.

 

[gabevh3]

Tonronto to the RangersView attachment 767475

Until team is sold *

 

[Kovalev27]

The amount of time it took to conspire to call that against us should seriously be investigated.

 

[SnowblindNYR]

Honestly if you bet a 100 dollars on that call being overturned the odds were so good it would be you'd lose money.

 

[mike14]

Very glad that it at least happened in a meaningless game.
Hopefully the league can sort its shit out before it matters (very wishful thinking)

 

[PuckLuck3043]

Put native 4K + high refresh-rate cameras in each net's crossbar and posts. We have the tech.

The NHL is a decade behind other sports.

 

[TheGortonConspiracy]

They need to come out after intermission and announce it was a good goal and that they are awarding an extra power-play to us for the inconvenience

 

[CasusBelli]

Honestly if you bet a 100 dollars on that call being overturned the odds were so good it would be you'd lose money.

Do they have that on FanDuel? Might start sport betting …

 

[KOVALEV022473]

I’m a Ranger fan, just not a homer. It wasn’t conclusively in until after the whistle

How did the puck get behind Dingle Berries skate? Was the whistle ever blown? GOOD GOAL!

 

[EdJovanovski]

You are nuts. That was absolutely in way before the whistle blew.

The puck was resting on the ice, inside the goal. We don’t see the ref even try to blow his whistle until seconds later. It’s rubbish.

Unless “intent” means “forgot a whistle needs to be blown, but it shouldn’t have been blown anyway, because the puck cleanly went in before the goaltender had control of it.”

do you have video of this? you saw the puck in the net before the whistle? Or do you mean you assume it was under his pad? Because the video when Sam was saying you see the puck before the whistle he was wrong and when you actually see the puck is clearly after the whistle. As far as I know it’s always been that you can’t just assume the puck was under his pad if it’s not conclusive you can’t overturn the call on the ice

 

[CasusBelli]

They need to come out after intermission and announce it was a good goal and that they are awarding an extra power-play to us for the inconvenience

Cue “Wouldn’t it Be Nice” by Beach Boys

 

[Chytilmania]

They need to come out after intermission and announce it was a good goal and that they are awarding an extra power-play to us for the inconvenience

Just announce it 3-3 like when they brought the Penguins back out from the locker room and they won the shootout.

 

[gabevh3]

They need to come out after intermission and announce it was a good goal and that they are awarding an extra power-play to us for the inconvenience

They will apologize tomorrow as usual.

 

[RangerLifer]

The puck was resting on the ice, inside the goal. We don’t see the ref even try to blow his whistle until seconds later. It’s rubbish.

Unless “intent” means “forgot a whistle needs to be blown, but it shouldn’t have been blown anyway, because the puck cleanly went in before the goaltender had control of it.”

Yes. The puck was in the net long before the ref even got his whistle.

 

[NYR94]

Maybe when the NHL gets its billion dollar expansion fee for the next team they'll invest some of that money into new technology oh wait they won't

 

[ecemleafs]

My favorite. Intent to blow the whistle. Unless Lundqvist is in the crease, then there's never any intent to blow the whistle ever.

an utterly ridiculous after the fact excuse. they literally never blew the whistle there. if they intended to blow the whistle then they would have blown the whistle.

 

[Profet]

Brace yourselves for the early third period Rangers penalty.

 

[NoQuitInNewMexico]

No one else gambles in this league? No execs, no league officials, just the Ottawa Senators third line center?