[OOT] February 1 with eleven games.

[jonesy]

Originally Posted by browna

Did the slash prevent him from making the save? No. Puck was under him or in the process of dropping out of his equipment, and it trickled out. If you're taking that specific rule and that review to its word about the interference preventing the goalie from making the save, it's the right call.

Well, slashing is a penalty, especially to the head. Play should be dead. And yes, a slash to the head will prevent you from making a save. Think about it, probably took a bit of his attention off the play.

[Major Major]

Hilarity on the oilers broadcast...

Caggiula pushes bernier's glove over the goal line after he had covered the puck in the crease. Remanda correctly dismisses any chance this goal will stand. The refs review the puck ONLY FOR WEATHER IT CROSSED THE LINE, which it did. They call it a good goal on the ice. Bednar immediately makes the obvious challenge for GI. Remanda fails to connect the dots and now truly believes that the goal will stand because pushing a glove in doesn't fit his definition of GI. Which is hard to believe... Allow me to repeat. He now doesn't think the goalie being pushed into the net with clear possession of the puck underneath his glove is goaltender interference... Even though when he first saw it, he laughed at the notion it could be determined a goal. Now he's OUTRAGED. As is the whole oilers broadcast crew. But it comes at their own embarrassment as they clearly have no clue what is happening.

Also, the avs took a penalty on the play, but then Blake comeau scores a SHG on an ugly klefbom give away.

It's hard to believe remanda does this for a living with no clue and such an erratic temperament.

[Jacks]

I get that the call was terrible but the fact that Vegas broke the expansion franchise record for wins in game 50 is crazy. They weren't all flukes, lucky bounces or missed calls.

[ShotDownInFlames12]

Originally Posted by CrazyCaper

Vegas can do all they want in the regular season. Once the puck drops in Round 1, it's all 0-0 and will be a rude awakening to most of those guys. To me, they're a glorified Washington Capitals of years past. Tear is up in the regular season and fall apart in the playoffs.

Based on what?

[White Out 403]

Originally Posted by browna

Did the slash prevent him from making the save? No. Puck was under him or in the process of dropping out of his equipment, and it trickled out. If you're taking that specific rule and that review to its word about the interference preventing the goalie from making the save, it's the right call.

You're right, someone cracking a stick in half over your head likely has no affect on your ability to make a save. jesus christ. where is this post is terrible?

[browna]

Put a different way. If Neal doesn't touch the goalie, the puck still goes in the exact same way.

The issue of the rule is the interpretation of if interference occurs, that it legitimately prevented the goalie from making the save.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by browna

Did the slash prevent him from making the save? No. Puck was under him or in the process of dropping out of his equipment, and it trickled out. If you're taking that specific rule and that review to its word about the interference preventing the goalie from making the save, it's the right call.

lol

[browna]

Originally Posted by Resurrection

You're right, someone cracking a stick in half over your head likely has no affect on your ability to make a save. jesus christ. where is this post is terrible?

Hey smart guy, reading comprehension isn't great. Where was the puck when Neal hit the goalie? Already in the process of popping out. The slash didn't knock the goalie over which exposed the puck or similar.

Sure,shoild the slash have been a penalty? Sure. But that went uncalled by the ref, and the review is for the goalie interference preventing him from preventing rhrbgial, not to determine a penalty..

[Jacks]

Still should have been a penalty though if Mr Magoo wasn't officiating.

[wwkayaker]

The panel explained it correctly in that the play should have been blown dead and a slashing call assessed.

[dissentowner]

Originally Posted by browna

Put a different way. If Neal doesn't touch the goalie, the puck still goes in the exact same way.

The issue of the rule is the interpretation of if interference occurs, that it legitimately prevented the goalie from making the save.

Except Neal does touch the goalie and it was an obvious penalty. The NHL has a legit officiating problem, the fact that goal counted and Neal did not get a penalty is absolutely ridiculous!

[AC]

2-1 Vancouver over Chicago.

[browna]

Originally Posted by wwkayaker

The panel explained it correctly in that the play should have been blown dead and a slashing call assessed.

Agreed.

But once it gets to the review of goalie interference as it is worded, is to determine if the interference prevented the goalie from making the save, not just if the goalie gets touched or slashed or whatever. If the slash pushed the goalie in, or opened up the goalie and the puck popped out then it's clear interference.

The slash hit the head,after the save was made, and his head didn't move and thus didn't appear to affect the goalies ability to save the shot.

[direwolf]

Oilers get a point. Cup parade back on?

[hwy19man]

Final scores
http://scores.nbcsports.com/nhl/scor...p?day=20180201
http://sportsstats.cbc.ca/news/NHL-Recap-Roundups.aspx?date=02-01-2018