Quote:
Originally Posted by GioforPM
Most are falling back on appeal to the authority of the NHL, Bieksa (!) and other people who have no understanding of the rule and the terrible argument that the Flames have only themselves to blame for losing the series (which is irrelevant).
One thing few people bring up - every other way a goal is disallowed is also an illegal play everywhere else on the ice. Hitting a goalie (ie interference), puck with a hand pass or high stick. But everywhere else you can kick the puck anyway. Heck, there’s no rule that a D man can’t kick the puck away in the crease with a Rockette-like high kick. It’s a dumb rule.
|
Technically you can hand pass in the D-zone (dumb), and they use a different standard for hick sticking the puck into net vs elsewhere (dumb). But it's true that there is no other instance where kicking a puck is a violation.
The funny thing with high-sticking [the puck] is that it really doesn't seem to discourage players from doing it. I suppose we'd see even more wild swings without the rule, but it's the 'right' play to do it if the puck is heading backwards.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skaloper
This is all sorts of confusing but based on the fact you can stop a puck into the net the goal has to count. Coleman is in the process of stopping to look for the rebound but the battle caused him to go onto one skate and it just so happens his other one ended up in the perfect position to push the puck in.
I do wonder about the process of overturning the call on the ice. Did the fact the four refs were unanimous on it being pushed over intentionally play any part (ie if all four of them come to a unanimous decision does that mean the call on the ice is now no goal if Toronto says it's inconclusive) or did the ultimate decision come from Toronto?
|
We only know the 4 buffoons in Toronto were unanimous...we don't actually know what the Furlatt/McCauley though.
Release the audio of the discussion!!!!