04-21-2017, 08:37 PM
|
#41
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Brisbane
|
Watching all this superb goaltending in the playoffs makes me sad.
__________________
The masses of humanity have always had to surf.
|
|
|
The Following User Says Thank You to FireGilbert For This Useful Post:
|
|
04-21-2017, 08:50 PM
|
#42
|
Franchise Player
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by FireGilbert
Watching all this superb goaltending in the playoffs makes me sad.
|
came to post the same thing
people that think the Flames just gave up to many chances need to watch some games....Calgary gave up next to nothing, goalie couldn't stop a beach ball
__________________
GFG
|
|
|
04-21-2017, 08:56 PM
|
#43
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Calgary
|
I think that's a good goal for Boston in Ottawa. The puck is in the net a good while before the whistle. The call on the ice by the officials is goaltender interference but I don't know how that can be the case if the puck is loose in the crease.
|
|
|
04-21-2017, 08:56 PM
|
#44
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Brisbane
|
That goal can't count due to contact with the goalie, but who knows with some of the reviews these playoffs.
__________________
The masses of humanity have always had to surf.
|
|
|
04-21-2017, 08:56 PM
|
#45
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Calgary, AB
|
I think that should be a good goal.
__________________
Turn up the good, turn down the suck!
|
|
|
04-21-2017, 08:57 PM
|
#46
|
Franchise Player
|
that's a goal for anyone but the flames
|
|
|
04-21-2017, 08:57 PM
|
#47
|
I believe in the Jays.
|
That really should be a goal. I'm not sure it will be though.
|
|
|
04-21-2017, 08:58 PM
|
#48
|
Resident Videologist
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Calgary
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Biff
I think that's a good goal for Boston in Ottawa. The puck is in the net a good while before the whistle. The call on the ice by the officials is goaltender interference but I don't know how that can be the case if the puck is loose in the crease.
|
The contact is on the initial shot. He bumps Anderson on the follow through and flies over him.
Tough call. I don't think Anderson knew where the puck was anyways, but the on-ice call probably determines it.
|
|
|
04-21-2017, 08:58 PM
|
#49
|
Franchise Player
|
if they call that a goal and not Calgary's goal in game 2...then we will know its rigged against the Flames
__________________
GFG
|
|
|
04-21-2017, 08:58 PM
|
#50
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Calgary
|
To me, that's not goaltender interference. It's hunting for the rebound and incidental contact while playing the puck.
|
|
|
04-21-2017, 08:58 PM
|
#51
|
Powerplay Quarterback
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Calgary
|
Should be a goal
Will be in inconclusive and no goal
|
|
|
04-21-2017, 08:58 PM
|
#52
|
Lifetime Suspension
Join Date: Jul 2015
Location: Hmmmmmmm
|
No way this will count.
|
|
|
04-21-2017, 08:59 PM
|
#53
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: San Fernando Valley
|
I think they will go with the officials call of no goal.
|
|
|
04-21-2017, 09:00 PM
|
#54
|
Resident Videologist
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Calgary
|
I think it should have counted. Anderson wasn't going to find that puck regardless.
On-ice call is what determined it though.
|
|
|
04-21-2017, 09:00 PM
|
#55
|
Franchise Player
|
notice how the ref made their initial call, announced it, and then it was on Boston to challenge
__________________
GFG
|
|
|
04-21-2017, 09:00 PM
|
#56
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Seattle, WA
|
How's that not a goal?
__________________
It's only game. Why you heff to be mad?
|
|
|
04-21-2017, 09:01 PM
|
#57
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Brisbane
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by dino7c
notice how the ref made their initial call, announced it, and then it was on Boston to challenge
|
No challenge, everything is reviewed in OT. I like how the ref announced the initial call though unlike that Flames review where no one knew what was going on.
__________________
The masses of humanity have always had to surf.
|
|
|
04-21-2017, 09:02 PM
|
#58
|
Franchise Player
|
OMG, can't get any closer than that
__________________
GFG
|
|
|
04-21-2017, 09:03 PM
|
#59
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Calgary, AB
|
Garbage officiating continues.
How does that not fall under this rule?
Quote:
69.7 Rebounds and Loose Pucks - In a rebound situation, or where a goalkeeper and attacking player(s) are simultaneously attempting to play a loose puck, whether inside or outside the crease, incidental contact with the goalkeeper will be permitted, and any goal that is scored as a result thereof will be allowed.
|
__________________
Turn up the good, turn down the suck!
|
|
|
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to getbak For This Useful Post:
|
|
04-21-2017, 09:03 PM
|
#60
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Calgary
|
Wow. I bet they'll have one where a high-stick puts the puck in the net next. That'll get a review and will be disallowed, of course.
|
|
|
Thread Tools |
Search this Thread |
|
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 11:25 PM.
|
|