Quote:
Originally Posted by Textcritic
Here is the replay of Koskinen's save.
· Koskinen gets the puck in his glove at the 0:27 mark, and traps it against the post at 0:28. If the puck is trapped against the post, then it is most likely touching the goal line. If it is touching the goal line it is not a goal.
· At the 0:57 mark from the above-camera angle you can see Koskinen catching the puck in line with the post, and then trapping the puck against the post. In this better view, the puck is not just touching the goal line, it is still on top of it.
The goal-ruling on Luongo which I also remember was ruled a goal because his pad was clearly entirely inside the net with the puck underneath it. The puck—while not visible—could not have been anywhere but completely inside the goal.
This is entirely different from the situation on Saturday. The puck was inside the goal, inside Koskinen's glove, but also most likely trapped against the side of the post. Had this been ruled a goal on the ice, I am fairly confident it would have been overturned.
|
The replay from that perspective is like the reverse Bennett non goal and Gelinas non goal. The angle from the cam is distorted and misleading, but it looks to me at :28 the glove is well behind the goal line. Koskinen may have gotten it wedged to the post and the end position would have been ruled no goal, but it was in the air before that, and his glove was behind the goal line. He reached back and in.
We can argue all day about it being a goal or no goal, I still think it is, you think it is not and there is not enough evidence to prove either one conclusively. It was ruled inconclusive, and not a goal. At least it's not as controversial as the Gelinas one.