Quote:
Originally Posted by Erick Estrada
That happens pretty well every time a goal is called back by an offside challenge where a player is maybe millimeters offside. I don't like that either but it's the current rules. At the end of the day Coleman touched the puck with his glove. It is what it is.
|
By the book, the refs have to be able to determine if the touch on the puck allowed the offending team an advantage. It isn't just about whether they touched the puck, it was whether advantage was gained. So there isn't a "by the book" right call here. They can look at the replay and determine that the touch was inconsequential to the ongoing play. When the puck glances off Coleman's glove (it wasn't batted down or directed), the ref can determine that their is no advantage gained on the incidental contact. The rule states that it is in the opinion of the refs based on the context of the play. Unlike off-side calls which are black and white, hand passes are not simply a question of whether the puck hit someone's glove.
The correct statement would be: "In the opinion of the ref, the puck contacting Coleman's glove gave the offending team an advantage on the play and the goal is overturned" not "by the book, it was the right call to overturn." So it is completely fair for people to analyze the play and question the refs' opinions.