doublechili
For all intensive purposes, your nuts
- Apr 11, 2006
- 18,481
- 16,003
What is Goalie Interference? Isles VS Blue Jackets
- Thread starter SI90
- Start date
Viqsi
"that chick from Ohio"
It's not the goalie being in his crease, it's the attacker encroaching on it. Important difference.
Viqsi
"that chick from Ohio"
I look at that photo and I see skate contact on the line, which per my understanding would be within the crease. And Palmeri's momentum was already taking him into the crease under his own power.
Ah, got it....so contact happens, an in that .8 seconds between contact and goal is scored, you think somehow he should be able to reset?
So Merzlkin's click Palmierie's skates, but Merzlikins is in the crease....per your picture.....explain to me how the click of skates happens if Palmierie doesn't enter the crease....
tarheelhockey
Offside Review Specialist
For the record:
69.3.2 - “If a goalkeeper, in the act of establishing position within his goal crease, initiates contact with an attacking player who is in the goal crease, and this results in an impairment of the goalkeeper’s ability to defend his goal, and a goal is scored, the goal will be disallowed.”
(emphasis mine)
There’s no loophole here. It has already been affirmed by opposing counsel that contact occurred inside the goal crease. Counsel would have it that the goaltender’s initiation of said contact invalidates the application of Rule 69.3. However, counsel appears not to have read the rule in its entirety, as it specifically validates the decision to disallow any goal scored under these circumstances.
Past this point, the rest of the argument crumbles as it is premised upon an incomplete reading, and therefore an inappropriate application, of rule 69.
I rest my case.
69.3.2 - “If a goalkeeper, in the act of establishing position within his goal crease, initiates contact with an attacking player who is in the goal crease, and this results in an impairment of the goalkeeper’s ability to defend his goal, and a goal is scored, the goal will be disallowed.”
(emphasis mine)
There’s no loophole here. It has already been affirmed by opposing counsel that contact occurred inside the goal crease. Counsel would have it that the goaltender’s initiation of said contact invalidates the application of Rule 69.3. However, counsel appears not to have read the rule in its entirety, as it specifically validates the decision to disallow any goal scored under these circumstances.
Past this point, the rest of the argument crumbles as it is premised upon an incomplete reading, and therefore an inappropriate application, of rule 69.
I rest my case.
Viqsi
"that chick from Ohio"
Here's a bonus hypothetical for folks who are having trouble grasping this - if Palmieri and Elvis were both, like, all of two inches or so further out from the net (such that Palmieri's butt is no longer over the crease) and otherwise the exact same play happened in exactly the same way, that would be an equally easy call of No Interference, Good Goal. It's yet another "hockey is a game of inches" thing. This was the GI equivalent of hitting the crossbar.
Tres Peleches
Johnny Turncoat
- Jul 13, 2011
- 8,140
- 7,000
Yes, I think an NHL goalie could reset in 0.8 seconds after extremely mild contact. Do you not?
As a western conference fan with no skin in the game. That’s a horseshit call. The NHL is too easy on goalies.
Well unless it’s the Avs goalies and then Wedgwood can be injured writhing around on the ground and nothing will be done. Maybe I do have some skin in this game…
Well unless it’s the Avs goalies and then Wedgwood can be injured writhing around on the ground and nothing will be done. Maybe I do have some skin in this game…
I, for one, generally do not. I would actually trust the referees who make these kinds of judgments as well, which you can feel free to not if you wish, as is your right.
I know for a fact they can't, resetting isn't just getting back into a stance, it's tracking the puck, finding it again etc,
I don't think you realize how fast an 8th of a second is.
Viqsi
"that chick from Ohio"
If your starting goalie is unable to get set in 0.8 seconds after a tiny bump, I would suggest that he is not an NHL caliber goalie.
Which, in fairness, Elvis is not.
Viqsi
"that chick from Ohio"
By that standard, hon, I don't think there's ever been an NHL caliber goalie at any time in the history of the universe.
Chuck Norris Trophy
Registered User
- Jan 22, 2015
- 2,782
- 3,346
Yeah, as a Penguins fan who does not have much love for either of these teams, that is a horseshit call, f***ing embarrassing.
A fair opinion to hold. I personally disagree with it, but I respect your opinion.
josra33
Registered User
- Aug 11, 2008
- 4,659
- 5,924
josra33
Registered User
- Aug 11, 2008
- 4,659
- 5,924
With respect hon, if Elvis had time to reach out and push Palmieri and even STILL almost get set for the shot, he had time to get set if not for wasting it on pushing a guy who had already exited the crease.
tarheelhockey
Offside Review Specialist
How about 0.3 seconds? Is that enough time to reset?
Viqsi
"that chick from Ohio"
Palmeri didn't start to exit the crease until Elvis made his initial shove with the blocker; you're fixating on the followup with the catcher, which happened within fractions of a second. Try watching it in realtime.
Yea, you clearly have no idea how fast that is in real time....but let's try this,
Stand in front of a wall, have someone about 15 feet out with a tennis ball, if you let that ball go past you, you owe them $50 (incentive) then....have someone walk past you, slightly bump you, as the guy is throwing the ball, let me know how that ends up, k?
