What is Goalie Interference? Isles VS Blue Jackets

  • We sincerely apologize for the extended downtime. Our hosting provider, XenForo Cloud, encountered a major issue with their backup system, which unfortunately resulted in the loss of some critical data from the past year.

    What This Means for You:

    • If you created an account after March 2024, it no longer exists. You will need to sign up again to access the forum.
    • If you registered before March 2024 but changed your email, username, or password in the past year, those changes were lost. You’ll need to update your account details manually once you're logged in.
    • Threads and posts created within the last year have been restored.

    Our team is working with Xenforo Cloud to recover data using backups, sitemaps, and other available resources. We know this is frustrating, and we deeply regret the impact on our community. We are taking steps with Xenforo Cloud to ensure this never happens again. This is work in progress. Thank you for your patience and support as we work through this.

    In the meantime, feel free to join our Discord Server
Looks like GTI to me. Goalie had to push Palmieri out of the way to establish his position in the crease, and didn’t have time to reset before the shot on goal was taken.
Because he clips his skate outside the crease. It's nothing, all caused by by the goalie. If that's goalie interference, might as well treat them as defensemen near the crease. Good idea?
 
Goalie didn’t HAVE push him at all. He chose to and initiated that contact. Palmieris skates were never in the crease.

If I was a goalie I would just throw myself at the closest opposing player anytime there was a crowd or a screened shot in that case.
The overhead showed Palmieri’s body extended into the crease even if his skates were outside the crease. The goalie couldn’t establish his position in the crease without contact because of that. Just because a homer announcer said he had time to reset doesn’t mean GTI didn’t influence the goal.
 
A few years ago that was goalie interference, no goal. And then for the last few years they would have called it a good goal on the grounds that "the goalie had a chance to re-set his feet". But supposedly they have had recent meetings to discuss adjusting the rule, so it seems that there was an adjustment made to the rule. Because this is clearly not following the way they made the call in the last few years.
 
I thought the first review was more interference than the second one honestly.

Point is, this is reaching what's a catch in the NFL levels. The NHL has to get their shit together with this.
100% this. A blown call from time to time doesn't make the league look foolish. The almost willful inconsistency in what is and isn't a call does.
 
The overhead showed Palmieri’s body extended into the crease even if his skates were outside the crease. The goalie couldn’t establish his position in the crease without contact because of that. Just because a homer announcer said he had time to reset doesn’t mean GTI didn’t influence the goal.
Because Merzlikens clips his skate while outside the crease making him go off-balance to begin with

If Merzlikens skate doesn’t clip Palmieri, he’s not in that position in the first place
 
The overhead showed Palmieri’s body extended into the crease even if his skates were outside the crease. The goalie couldn’t establish his position in the crease without contact because of that. Just because a homer announcer said he had time to reset doesn’t mean GTI didn’t influence the goal.
If the crease is that kind of haven that you can clip as skate outside it and when the guy loses balance and torso goes in crease is GTI, make it fair game so that every goalie part outside the crease is subject to a box out. The game has never been called like that for good reason.

Anyway this isn't a real argument. Refs knew they made a boo-boo. You could see it in the call after review. But they also don't want to be shown up by Toronto either. Oh well.
 
I can see both sides of it:

On one hand your goalie should have access to the ice immediately outside of the crease, not to the hashmarks, but slightly outside I'd say it is reasonable

On the other hand you risk goalies doing this on purpose to disallow goals

So I donno, it's tough because a player in the crease isn't an automatic disallowed goal, so it's a bit of a grey area as far as what everyone is allowed to do. If you get too explicit, both sides will try and take advantage of it.
 
1. Merzlikens makes initial contact with Palmieri’s skate outside the crease making him slightly offbalance making him “lean” into the crease

2. Merzlikens then pushes Palmieri out of the way from a position HE CAUSED HIM TO BE IN

3. The puck was a redirection from out high with Merzlikens sliding the opposite way. The contact had ZERO bearing on his ability to play that puck

The referee and Toronto f***ed up
 
I can see both sides of it:

On one hand your goalie should have access to the ice immediately outside of the crease, not to the hashmarks, but slightly outside I'd say it is reasonable

On the other hand you risk goalies doing this on purpose to disallow goals

So I donno, it's tough because a player in the crease isn't an automatic disallowed goal, so it's a bit of a grey area as far as what everyone is allowed to do. If you get too explicit, both sides will try and take advantage of it.

Goalies have an area. It’s called the blue paint

Merzlikens made first contact with Palmieri’s skate outside of that blue paint
 
I can see both sides of it:

On one hand your goalie should have access to the ice immediately outside of the crease, not to the hashmarks, but slightly outside I'd say it is reasonable

On the other hand you risk goalies doing this on purpose to disallow goals
Over analysis. Refs screwed up. Toronto let bad judgment stand. It's that simple. If that happens in an actually important game (as opposed to between pretenders) it's a problem.
 
Not saying good call or bad call but Elvis isn't in the white ice to make contact
Screenshot_20250324_210308_Samsung Internet.jpg
 
Because Merzlikens clips his skate while outside the crease making him go off-balance to begin with

If Merzlikens skate doesn’t clip Palmieri, he’s not in that position in the first place.
You can see in the overhead view in the last video in post #1 at 11.1 seconds that Palmieri’s skate was in the crease where contact was made, and the ensuing body contact was a result of that. Just because a homer announcer says something doesn’t make it true.
 
I really don’t understand how goalie interference calls are this hard for the league to get a hold of.

-If a players skates are outside of the crease and there’s contact, then no goalie interference.

-If a players skates are in the crease and there’s no contact, then there’s no goalie interference.

-If a players skates are in the crease and the goalie initiates contact in a way that isn’t attempting to save the puck, then no goalie interference.

-If a players skates are in the crease and he initiates contact with the goalie and impedes the goalies attempt to make a save, then it’s goalie interference.

It should NOT be this difficult for the league to figure out. This isn’t like the NFL’s “what is a catch?” thing where there’s a vague definition of what a football move or procession is, it’s something that can 100% be looked at objectively.
 
3. The puck was a redirection from out high with Merzlikens sliding the opposite way. The contact had ZERO bearing on his ability to play that puck

The referee and Toronto f***ed up
Sure did - the push put palms in a better spot to deflect the puck.

Seriously, it was bad goaltending. And he looked the fool enough that the ref thought he wouldn't have intentionally been that foolish.
 

Ad

Ad