The lone OOT game is a Wednesday night rivalry game, Original Six style. It should make for a good doubleheader prior to the Flames game.
A reminder that the Flames game will commence on Sportsnet 360. The West channel will show the Flames games immediately following the Leafs-Blackhawks game, the other 3 regional channels will get it after a short SN Central post game show.
Man the nhl has to be the biggest joke of a league how the heck was that Chicago goal a clean goal what is goaltender interference anymore? does anyone even know?
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Robo For This Useful Post:
Ha-ha what a joke the NHL is. They call the Matthews goal no good and they call the Hawks 2nd goal good which had way more contact. JOKE OF A LEAGUE. Just want consistency.
The Following User Says Thank You to savemedrzaius For This Useful Post:
Man the nhl has to be the biggest joke of a league how the heck was that Chicago goal a clean goal what is goaltender interference anymore? does anyone even know?
I’m lost.
Guy lands on opposing teams goalie - good goal
Tkachuk nudges a guy who then slightly bumps his own goalie - no goal
It’s friggen ridiculous and they even have replay to get it right.
The Following User Says Thank You to SuperMatt18 For This Useful Post:
Leafs get screwed too much? Welcome to the club as Flames and Oilers fans probably aren't going to feel pity seeing they got screwed in the playoffs. I feel the league needs to be black and white on these replays. If a goaltender is contacted it's automatically no goal. That contact on the Leafs goaltender was much worse than Matthews the other game or Tkachuk on Saturday. It just looks bad on the league when they can't get these calls right.
But on the Chicago goal, he doesn't fall on the goalie until after the puck goes in. I have no problem with it being a goal.
Before he even falls on him he impedes the goaltender's stick. I have a massive problem with that goal considering some of the goals that have been overturned on much less contact.
A Predators goal yesterday was upheld on what I thought was pretty clear goalie interference.
Does the league know what they're doing? If fans are confused, I'm sure coaches and players are, too. Seemingly no rhyme or reason to why certain goals are called back for interference, and others aren't.
__________________
KNOWLEDGE IS POWER. I love power.
Before he even falls on him he impedes the goaltender's stick. I have a massive problem with that goal considering some of the goals that have been overturned on much less contact.
My concern is with those that have been weakly overturned (Matthews' being the most recent example)
Maybe they should just get rid of goaltender interference as a reviewable play and only use replay to see if pucks cross the line. If the replay ruling is going to be a coin flip what's the point of delaying the game 5 minuets for the review?
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Erick Estrada For This Useful Post:
The league needs to talk to the refs and get their crap together. There must be some kind of guidelines they are meant to follow.
Personally I feel like goaltender interference shouldn't be challengeable. If the ref calls it a goal on the ice then it's a goal.
If the Matthews goal had counted last game I would be fine with this counting.
But how can the ref call Matthews goal good on the ice and then have it overturned over such little contact.
But a much more egregious situation tonight is called a good goal. It's a joke and if something like this were to happen in the playoffs it is going to look really bad.
The Following User Says Thank You to savemedrzaius For This Useful Post:
I can't blame Seabrook for being ticked off at the linesmen for that blown icing call which led to the Leafs 1st goal. All 4 officials were terrible in this game!
Video review should be used for two things: to see if the puck crossed the line, and for egregious offsides. By that I mean the linesman can review an offside, but if he can't overturn the call while watching a replay at regular speed and no ridiculous magnification the call should stand.