GDT: Tuesday, Feb. 16th, 2016

Status
Not open for further replies.

insider

Registered User
Nov 14, 2003
2,345
0
This is going to be the longest goal review ever I bet..

Yup. And the play isn't even reviewable.

No, it was not kicked in.

No, no goaltender interference.

The goaltender did have it and the play should have been blown dead. But that's not reviewable, now, is it?
 

Beef Invictus

Revolutionary Positivity
Dec 21, 2009
130,272
170,749
Armored Train
I only saw two periods of the Devils/Flyers game, but I'm pretty sure every single call the officials made was wrong in some way.


Weird game overall. The first period Devils PP where it seemed everyone thought they had scored 3 or 4 times before they actually did score was just bizarre.
 

Daz28

Registered User
Nov 1, 2010
12,761
2,217
Getting it right

Anaheim goal is reviewed, and not "kicked in". We follow with a coach's challenge for goalie interference. Why wouldn't they just "get it right" the first time they looked at it.

Good goal anyways. Wasted TO. Maybe we can add a 2nd coaches challenge to make sure it's onside to get it right.
 

t0nedeff

Registered User
Jun 29, 2010
9,985
4,198
Yup. And the play isn't even reviewable.

No, it was not kicked in.

No, no goaltender interference.

The goaltender did have it and the play should have been blown dead. But that's not reviewable, now, is it?
How is it not interference? The goalie had it covered and Perrons knee pushed it into the net.
 

Raccoon Jesus

We were right there
Oct 30, 2008
63,359
66,194
I.E.
Kings are dead in the water.

2015 Kings are back--all the indicators, none of the results, and late game collapses left and right.

Sutter is riding the **** out of Doughty and Muzzin now--message to Lombardi.

Change now, or fall out of the playoffs.
 

insider

Registered User
Nov 14, 2003
2,345
0
How is it not interference? The goalie had it covered and Perrons knee pushed it into the net.

Because Davidson pushed him in.

I'm mad about that goal because a) it was covered and b) that was a very, very weak penalty. But hey, it's the Oilers.
 

Del Preston

Registered User
Mar 8, 2013
63,171
78,956
Because Davidson pushed him in.

I'm mad about that goal because a) it was covered and b) that was a very, very weak penalty. But hey, it's the Oilers.
Davidson did not push him. Perron went down on his own.
 

t0nedeff

Registered User
Jun 29, 2010
9,985
4,198
Because Davidson pushed him in.

I'm mad about that goal because a) it was covered and b) that was a very, very weak penalty. But hey, it's the Oilers.

Pushed him in? My god you should apply for a Nhl ref position.
 

YakDavid

Registered User
Dec 12, 2010
5,613
3,359
Because Davidson pushed him in.

I'm mad about that goal because a) it was covered and b) that was a very, very weak penalty. But hey, it's the Oilers.

"pushed" he had his stick tied up and fell into the goalie
 

Teemu Salami

Empty Ketchup Bottle
May 9, 2013
9,037
308
Orange County, CA
Perron was going for it and he was hooked down as you can see at the end of the play behind the net he literally had someone over his back. I'd be so annoyed if they were picky about that, letting Gaudreau's count, but this one didn't meet certain requirements.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad