the valiant effort
settle down, bud
- Apr 17, 2017
- 4,537
- 8,739
it could be but the refs have ruined it.This is hockey at its best!!!!!!!!!
On the first Panther goal, realistically a player can back up into a defenseman, fall into the goalie and its the defenseman fault as he caused the fall
I dont like that as a standard
Well likely a Floridas Bettmans standard
Was ruled the Oilers defender pushed the panther into his goaltender. I could see it.First two goals by Florida are a travesty. The first was absolutely interference. In what universe does that review call go against the Oilers and entail a PP?
I could not. I need to see this again. It looked like the Panther let himself fall into the goalie on purpose. The announcer was saying: "I think that's on Bennett."Was ruled the Oilers defender pushed the panther into his goaltender. I could see it.
The push alone wasn't enough to allow that goal the fact that Kulak's skate happened to be behind the push was. Bad call to challenge IMO. Now I'm wondering if that McDavid crossbar short handed doesn't come back to Haunt them. BobRobSky is starting to get settled in. I swear I saw this movie last year.Was ruled the Oilers defender pushed the panther into his goaltender. I could see it.
Bennet absolutely sold it and took advantage of the situation. Was a crafty play by a veteran player. Still nothing wrong with the call.I could not. I need to see this again. It looked like the Panther let himself fall into the goalie on purpose. The announcer was saying: "I think that's on Bennett."
In any event, for a forward who steps into the blue paint... there should have to be an egregious action from the defender to absolve the interfering forward. It certainly was not called like that. This is not a serious league.
Edmonton's problem was it wasn't Brendan Gallagher.
The push alone wasn't enough to allow that goal the fact that Kulak's skate happened to be behind the push was. Bad call to challenge IMO. Now I'm wondering if that McDavid crossbar short handed doesn't come back to Haunt them. BobRobSky is starting to get settled in. I swear I saw this movie last year.
There was a shove not violent but a shove none the less.Who are they saying pushed him? Walman?
All i saw was Bennett backing into Kulaks skate which Kulak has the right to his space and he falls into goalie.
I can see that Kulak's skate could have had an impact, but that's irrelevant to me. A forward encroaching on the blue paint should not be there, let alone allow himself to fall into the goalie on an incidental contact. They should review this officiating at GMs meetings. They are either serious about protecting the goalie or they are a bunch of amateurs. Then reviewing it and assessing a penalty in the absurd interpretation just compounds the idiocy.Bennet absolutely sold it and took advantage of the situation. Was a crafty play by a veteran player.
There was a shove not violent but a shove none the less.
I understand your view. And I don't necessarily disagree. Was a tough break for the Oilers and to get penalized afterwards is just added salt to the wound. Just saying the call as it was made had some merit.I can see that Kulak's skate could have had an impact, but that's irrelevant to me. A forward encroaching on the blue paint should not be there, let alone allow himself to fall into the goalie on an incidental contact. They should review this officiating at GMs meetings. They are either serious about protecting the goalie or they are a bunch of amateurs.
I can see that Kulak's skate could have had an impact, but that's irrelevant to me. A forward encroaching on the blue paint should not be there, let alone allow himself to fall into the goalie on an incidental contact. They should review this officiating at GMs meetings. They are either serious about protecting the goalie or they are a bunch of amateurs. Then reviewing it and assessing a penalty in the absurd interpretation just compounds the idiocy.
For me it basically ended up being a tag team slew foot. I'm not sure what tree stump could have kept his feet on that play. Just my take.i will take everyones word cause i see little or not enough to warrant Bennett ending up in the crease
Bad call imo
Worse was the challenge
Its 1-1 no need to risk it, its like Oiler staff forgot who they were playing expecting a favourable decision even if you were 75 percent sure
That argument would have some weight if the forward were standing elsewhere when it happened. If he were standing well away from the blue paint when it happened, he would not have affected the play of the goalie.For me it basically ended up being a tag team slew foot. I'm not sure what tree stump could have kept his feet on that play. Just my take.