Not. That was a good challenge.Stupid coaches challenge with 3 minutes left down by a goal.
Not. That was a good challenge.Stupid coaches challenge with 3 minutes left down by a goal.
Nope. Don’t put your team shorthanded with 3 minutes left down by a goal unless it’s a slam dunk.Not. That was a good challenge.
Nope. Don’t put your team shorthanded with 3 minutes left down by a goal.
Besides there was only 1 contact by Tanev and Sorokin had time to right himself.
Or, it wasn’t a legit goal and its tied with 3 mins to go.Nope. Don’t put your team shorthanded with 3 minutes left down by a goal unless it’s a slam dunk.
Besides there was only 1 contact by Tanev and Sorokin had time to right himself.
It was bang-bang. Even slowed down there wasn’t that much timeNope. Don’t put your team shorthanded with 3 minutes left down by a goal unless it’s a slam dunk.
Besides there was only 1 contact by Tanev and Sorokin had time to right himself.
I see this perspective, but disagree. I figure that challenge is at least a 50-50 bet, whereas 3 minutes of even strength hockey to score one goal with this team is way less than 50-50Nope. Don’t put your team shorthanded with 3 minutes left down by a goal unless it’s a slam dunk.
Besides there was only 1 contact by Tanev and Sorokin had time to right himself.
Didn’t look strong on their first goalGeorge is stronger than I thought
Maybe if Nelson didn’t deflect it in the challenge would have been successful but you don’t make that gamble at that point of the game.It was bang-bang. Even slowed down there wasn’t that much time
I don’t know how much it hindered him, hit even if it does the smallest amount you have to call it, because HE is the one he went into the crease of his own accord
Call was probably made by suit-jockey incels in Torontolol Roy is sweet, ripped the refs/nhl - there wasn’t enough interference lolz awesome. ‘I guess I didn’t play enough games’
You'd think onus is on player to not make contact if he goes in thereCall was probably made by suit-jockey incels in Toronto
It was the smart thing to do and it's not a close call. Given the uncertain nature of goalie challenges and what we saw it was probably 40/60 proposition that we would win the challenge. Compare that with the likelihood that we would score a goal in the last three minutes. League wide it is probably well under a 40 percent chance down a goal with 3 minutes left even for the best teams and god knows what it is for the Isles. Then throw in the likelihood of an empty net goal against. Nope, challenging gave the Isles the best chance to get to OT and it was unquestionably the right thing to do.Nope. Don’t put your team shorthanded with 3 minutes left down by a goal unless it’s a slam dunk.
Besides there was only 1 contact by Tanev and Sorokin had time to right himself.
An unfortunate loss, played pretty well but it’s hard to win when you only score two goals. I still think the refs got the call wrong on the goalie interference, given recent calls around the league but they’ve got to defend better than they did on that shift.
Nope. Don’t put your team shorthanded with 3 minutes left down by a goal unless it’s a slam dunk.
Besides there was only 1 contact by Tanev and Sorokin had time to right himself.
Initially I thought it was a good goal, but the only way I felt the Isles could have won if the NHL felt Tanev interferered with Sorokin enough, which was false. For goaltender interference challenges, I feel the ones that are worth challenging are: 1) When an offensive player is in the opposing goalie's crease to block his vision and a goal goes in. 2) When an offensive player clearly interferes with the opposing goalie right when a goal is scored.Took me a bit to get into it this year. I finally do and immediately annoyed
Agree. I didnt love the challenge either. It was pretty clearly a good goal.