[OOT] It is game four of the Stanley Cup Final!

[AC]

I hope Colorado scores the Stanley Cup winning goal on a controversial kicked in puck and all hell breaks loose.

[blender]

I am fine with Cooper pointing it out. He has the platform to call the league out on it's BS officiating.

Sure, the play on the winning goal, while not egregious on its own, is still just another sample of the absurdly inconsistent way the game is called (and reviewed, and even supplementary disciplined).

Even though I prefer less penalties in general, tonight was ridiculous. There were outright penalties not called throughout the third.

I'm happy to hear Cooper call it out.

[flamesrule_kipper34]

I'm honestly confused.

Let's assume unequivocally the Avs have 6 players on the ice and it's too many men. Why is barely anyone in the media talking about the Lightning having 7 at one point during that sequence as well?

Seems kind of silly especially when it always seems we get the short end of the stick in "spirit of the rule" interpretations.

[Manhattanboy]

Difference is the Flames were deliberately screwed by the NHL in these playoffs.

I want a frickin Royal Commission to investigate. The fix was in.

[getbak]

From this tweet...

https://twitter.com/user/status/1539825506551566339


Looking at the Tampa players...

1. The player at centre ice: Replaced the player who has just stepped off the ice behind the linesman at the blue line.
   
2. The player skating over the Spectrum logo: Replacing the player on the ice skating past the bench just to the left of the Verizon logo.
   
3. The player coming onto the ice in front of the Adidas logo: Replacing the player skating in front of the Pepsi ad.

Not seen in this shot: The two Tampa d-men and goalie still in the Tampa zone.

Colorado has 6 players on the ice, but Tampa has 7 (and an 8th who has just barely left the ice).

----------


So, now we're going to get a bunch of hand-wringing and complaining about strictly enforcing the rules of the game, and they'll add Too Many Men to the Coach's Challenge... and we'll all ####ing hate it because it ruins the flow of the game.

[Barnet Flame]

Originally Posted by activeStick

Mr. Kadri likely makes his return tonight

And nothing much happened.

[Jiri Hrdina]

Geez the nhl summary apparently had an extra player listed on ice at the time of the winning goal
That’s not a good look

[AC]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

Geez the nhl summary apparently had an extra player listed on ice at the time of the winning goal
That’s not a good look

Is that uncommon? I bet when a goal is scored during a line change you see all kinds of funny numbers for players on the ice.

[butterfly]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

Geez the nhl summary apparently had an extra player listed on ice at the time of the winning goal
That’s not a good look

Did they all get credited with a +1?

[Caged Great]

Originally Posted by AC

Is that uncommon? I bet when a goal is scored during a line change you see all kinds of funny numbers for players on the ice.

I remember a Flame goal from 7 or 8 years ago get called back and us getting a too many men on the ice penalty from the back d-man changing and they both happened to be on the ice at the same time (both right by the bench).

[N-E-B]

Do I think Cooper has a point? Yes.

Do I care? Absolutely not. Get bent Tampa.

[Erick Estrada]

The problem with line changes is that teams are generally pretty sloppy at it (Flames were terrible this season) and the officials usually only make a call if it's egregius. You can argue on the goal that Tampa's line change was even sloppier with players coasting to the bench while their replacement was already on the ice. Maybe the league can send out a memo to teams in the summer saying they are going to call this more closely next season but I hope to hell this isn't something that gets added to replay as there's as much grey area to what is too many men on the ice as there is to what constitutes a kicking motion when you start dissecting in slow motion. It would turn into another situation where the command center can influence the outcome of a game to their liking as we saw in the 2nd round of the playoffs.

[edslunch]

maybe there should be a tagging rule

[tvp2003]

“The situation room has determined there was a “distinct changing motion” by Colorado #29.”

Probably.

[The Cobra]

Originally Posted by butterfly

Did they all get credited with a +1?

Yep, and you can get an assist and not a plus 1 if you leave before the goal is scored.

I once saw a guy shoot the puck from far out at the net just before it went into the net. He got credited with a goal but not a plus 1.

[flamesrule_kipper34]

From The Athletic:

Two former NHL referees contacted by The Athletic who examined the video said that in their opinion this play wasn’t too many men. One former linesman said that while it’s close, loose line changes happen all the time and very few officials would have blown a play like this dead in overtime. He also noted that the Lightning had seven players on the ice, including two players at the bench, like MacKinnon, with the players who came on for them also engaged in the play.

And to clarify, the official scoresheet was also amended to only have 5 players on the ice for the Avs.

[tvp2003]

Originally Posted by flamesrule_kipper34

And to clarify, the official scoresheet was also amended to only have 5 players on the ice for the Avs.

My guess is that they are automatically generated; the original didn't even have Mackinnon on the ice as the "6th skater":

https://twitter.com/user/status/1539826218404560897

[HitterD]

Originally Posted by tvp2003

“The situation room has determined there was a “distinct changing motion” by Colorado #29.”

Probably.

This quote is pretty funny to me considering #29 scored the first goal of the game off his skate. Good goal of course but I just don’t know/trust that rule anymore either lol

[IamNotKenKing]

Originally Posted by Mean Mr. Mustard

The difference between having players on and off the ice is that the men changing can't be in possession of the puck or interfering with the play. The fact that there are more players on the ice than 5 is irrelevant. It looks like Kadri was the player going onto the ice and he was on the opposite side of the rink while in possession of the puck all the while Byram was still on the playing surface.

As per the rules that is easily too many men and if it happened against my team I would be pissed.

Byram is a red-herring as he is not the changed for player. It is the guy at the blue-line (MacKinnon) who was changing for Kadri.
I think it was Nichuskin who was about to change, then changed his mind because he saw the puck was coming up, but Kadri was already on and MacKinnon did eventually come off. He is the guy at the blue line.

https://twitter.com/user/status/1539834305694007297

[Toonage]

Haven't gone through the whole thread so forgive me if this was covered but didn't Colorado lose a series because of a goal called back (or they gave one up on a PP because of) when Landeskog (I think it was him) didn't get off the ice fast enough on a line change? Think this was 2019.

Anyway, it was a nit picky call on a play that happens all the time like Bednar says. I recall the Avs being pretty unhappy at the time. They must be feeling pretty smug right now.