Quote:
Originally Posted by Ace
Might have been said several times, but the most frustrating thing about the 'no goal' is that it should have been ruled a goal, and it should have been on the ducks to challenge. The fact that GG was the one having to risk his challenge doesn't make sense to me. Unless it's actually written somewhere that the refs can just review whatever they feel like whenever they want, if so then fine.
|
Was thinking the same thing, call on the ice was "no goal" not "goalie interference", it was maddening it was decided that it was a goal and then overturned it all in one swoop. complete BS, it's not supposed to work that way.