GDT: Gold Medal Game: Canada Vs Russia | 1:00PM EST 7PM CET

[NinjaKick]

even if a delay of game penalty was called it's not guaranteed that Russia will tie the game
Russia had a 3-1 lead and blew it... not the refs
the best team won today

 

[Hanji]

For those saying that the puck hitting the camera should have been delay of game, here's what the IIHF rules say:

RULE 135 – DELAY OF GAME/SHOOTING OR THROWING THE PUCK OUT OF PLAY

"v. A player who lifts the puck from the defending zone and hits the scoreclock or any structural object above the ice surface, causing a stoppage of play, will not be assessed a penalty."

Right, but the camera wasn't directly above the ice surface, nor was it mounted to the glass. It was situated behind the glass.

The puck went out of play before it hit the camera, so the rule shouldn't apply here.

Should've been a delay of game penalty.

 

[blindpass]

I mean, I don't care much. Happy for Canada... but that puck was out of bounds.. the very camera it hit shows that it was already out of bounds... I guarantee twitter will be loaded with images of that puck out of bounds very soon.

If it was the other way I wouldn't be making an issue of it. Never feel great about an over the glass call, esp. when already shorthanded.

 

[Esko6]

You don't like the penalty music?

The penalty music was silly and kinda funny the first time, but some of the other music was enraging. Especially that one song with lyrics that just said "yupyupyupyup"

 

[SabresSharks]

Separated shoulder? All hail, Hayton. That's one ballsy player.

 

[Llewzaher]

v. A player who lifts the puck from the defending zone and hits the scoreclock or any structural object above the ice surface, causing a stoppage of play, will not be assessed a penalty.

Apology awaited.

Above the surface ..( camera was out of play ). I am Canadian and glad we won . But should have been a 5 on 3 for Russia ...

Still think we would have killed it off tho

 

[kp61c]

It was connected to the glass, which is a structural object.

but it wasn't above the ice surface.

 

[BruinsBtn]

The right call was not made as the puck did not hit the camera above the ice surface (i.e. in any area that would be covered if the ice surface was vertically projected). It hit it outside of the ice boundaries.

Boo hoo. It's an extremely fine line and the refs weren't sure. It's inches of difference. Far, far less egregious than half of the brutal calls in the game. Enough with the whining already. Russia's goalie made a brutal play on the winner and dove all game. He should have had two penalties against him for diving. Same difference, better team won.

 

[Divine]

And read what I wrote afterwards. I dont go back in time to edit the posts just for the sake of being "right". I didnt know of such rule and by the looks of it the rule is indeed questionable and has some grey area to it.

Well then don't make comments when you don't know the rules and expect not to be called out? This whole argument started because of your ignorance.

 

[Hockeyfrilla]

This gave me chills

 

[bagsw]

Congratulations to Canada, your guys have the biggest balls of this tournament. Even Hayton has them, only real leaders score equalizer in final

 

[trilobyte]

I decided to walk my dog when the Russians went up 3-1. When I got home the Canadians were receiving their gold medals. I feel that, somehow, I was responsible for this.

Sorry, credit goes to your dog

 

[BruinsBtn]

Above the surface ... I am Canadian and glad we won . But should have been a 5 on 3 for Russia ...

Still think we would have killed it off tho

It hangs over the glass partially.

 

[DeeQ]

Onnea Kanada!!!

 

[Czechboy]

Again, you're acting like there is instant replay. A ref can't see that. Russia should have never had a powerplay for the dive a minute earlier anyway.

I mean, the ref standing right there called it a penalty... that is clear as day in the replay! Why it got reversed is beyond me but the call on the ice was a penalty.

Again though, Happy for Canada! Nice gold. Russia still had to score. Feel awful for them.

 

[JustNapalmIt]

Depends if a camera is "structural"

and is considered "Over the ice" (which it is but it also isn't in another sense).

 

[RalphKing]

but it wasn't above the ice surface.

Excuse me?

 

[Bustedprospect]

Wow what a game i say this as a Swede.

Really had it all. The grit, the excitement and finally the heroes.

This one will forever be a classic.

 

[Doghandler]

Congratulations to Canada. The WJC always delivers.
Next year I hope we step it up in the RR.

 

[canswetoxic]

If it was the other way I wouldn't be making an issue of it. Never feel great about an over the glass call, esp. when already shorthanded.

It's okay when we do it.

 

[Kairi Zaide]

Boo hoo. It's an extremely fine line and the refs weren't sure. It's inches of difference. Far, far less egregious than half of the brutal calls in the game. Enough with the whining already. Russia's goalie made a brutal play on the winner and dove all game. He should have had two penalties against him for diving. Same difference, better team won.

I'm Canadian... And there was an official that called it before they discussed together. Agreed it's a matter of inches, but a rule is a rule, and it was wrongly assumed the whole camera was directly above the ice.

 

[Saidin]

v. A player who lifts the puck from the defending zone and hits the scoreclock or any structural object above the ice surface, causing a stoppage of play, will not be assessed a penalty.

Apology awaited.

Can't get any clearer than that...

 

[kp61c]

russians were crapped all over by the finnish refs and were a way better team, tough break.

 

[llwyd]

Well, about Canadian fans being classy in victory... Hmm.

 

[CarlWinslow]

but it wasn't above the ice surface.

But it’s attached to the glass. If it hits the glass it’s not a penalty. I would assume that’s why the call was made as it was.

 

[Jagemon]

Well then don't make comments when you don't know the rules and expect not to be called out? This whole argument started because of your ignorance.

Again that rule is really not as simple as you make it sound to be.