Lets Talk About: Goaltender Interference

[powderjunkie]

Seems like a good night to bump this.

Tonights incident was the mediumest shade of grey to me. As currently [and poorly] written right now, I could see arguments either way, so I think not challenging was definitely the right call.

I suppose my question is, why do we even have a goal crease? For me, if an attacking player is remaining in the crease by his own volition longer than necessary and not actively playing the puck, then the threshold for what constitutes interference should be extremely low/strict.

Conversely, contact outside the crease should be treated more liberally.

The league needs to sort this crap out. Maybe Rittich should have down a 360 like Murray the other night.

[Harry Lime]

Watch Markstrom protect his own crease the next time he is in a game. The refs let a lot of hacking go, when the opposition is in the crease. The line is drawn at half of a Billy Smith. A shot to the back with a blocker will clear a net pretty quickly, and Markstrom is one of the better goalies at achieving this.

[jlh2640]

I thought the goal he scored could’ve been challenged but not at that point in a game. But man. With all the quick whistles sometimes to not get one there.

[Benched]

I didn’t see interference tonight. I wanted to. It was mayhem. It’d have saved our bacon. But IMO it wasn’t there and the no challenge was the right call.

[Enoch Root]

this year, they have been calling basically any contact in the crease

not sure who it was that was standing overtop of Rittich, but he definitely pushed Rittich's pad backwards

for me, that was enough to challenge

also, with the team struggling, I want to see the coach stand up for his team, I want to see him taking charge and being a leader

but, silence

apparently he was happy with the 3rd period though

[The Cobra]

I didn’t see any interference at all.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[soulchoice]

I don’t see any interference at all, nor any reason to blow the whistle prior to the goal.

In my humble opinion, if Ward made the challenge, it would have been a PP for the Leafs.

[Always Earned Never Given]

Originally Posted by The Cobra

I didn’t see any interference at all.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Actually they could have called two!

On the initial chance, Rittich could not get set as Hyman nudged him backwards with his right skate. (Tanev barely touched Hyman)

He would have them been set for the rest of the scramble.

Then look at Hyman's stick when Rittich is trying to pounce on the puck right before the goal.
It impedes Rittich mobility (chest and arms).

They still would have called it a good goal because TO but this is what I dislike about NHL officiating. If a player gets a stick in the gut, it is hooking and a penalty is called (player is vertical so easy to see) but when a goalie is horizontal and there is hooking, refs are confused!

Wished we had under the ice surface cams for these calls!

[Erick Estrada]

I think Ward made the right call not to challenge as 100% that does not get overturned. There was contact but it was before the puck went into the net. The only thing I question is if the official could actually see the puck in the scrum as we have seen many plays blown down where the puck was more visible than this one but that's something only the official can answer. All challenging that call would have accomplished is the risk of getting no points when they were a minute away from 1 in the bag.

[Bingo]

Even if it was interference you can't challenge it at that point in the game.

I've literally been right in predicting interference challenge results something like 40% of the time.

You can't lose a coin toss and give them a late powerplay.

Take the point you didn't deserve and get out of there.

[jroc]

I think that was about as grey as it gets. If the ref called it off in the moment, and Keefe wanted to challenge it, I don't think it would have got overturned that way either.

[CroFlames]

Originally Posted by Bingo

Even if it was interference you can't challenge it at that point in the game.

I've literally been right in predicting interference challenge results something like 40% of the time.

You can't lose a coin toss and give them a late powerplay.

Take the point you didn't deserve and get out of there.

It was the "right" move to not challenge to give up a PK. You do the low risk play as a coach to gain what is essentially a guaranteed point.

But, maybe you gamble because of how good the PK has been the past two games?

The review itself is a coin toss, but it's a pretty big reward if it falls your way and the risk is, in this particular case, acceptable IMO. I would have challenged.

The bigger problem here is how goalie interference is called so wildly different from game to game.

[Geeoff]

I feel like the entire NHL Rulebook is just a collection of calls that the ref *could* pull from in the name of the real rulebook: Game Management

[powderjunkie]

Does the rulebook say anything about 'making an effort to leave the crease and/or avoid contact'? It's the thing broadcasters always focus on, but I'm not sure it is 'officially' true?


Some sports have a lot more transparency in how these things are adjudicated (rugby).

Spitballing an idea for challenges: 2 separate judges review the incident for up to 120 seconds (add a minute or two in the last 5 mins of a game/playoffs).

2-0 to overturn call = overturned
1-1 to overturn = call on ice stands, no penalty
2-0 to confirm call = penalty


It's a bigger conversation, but I'd prefer to go to 1 on-ice ref and 1 in the building with monitor and comms (can also lace them up if the ref gets hurt), and the authority to immediately review/communicate anything. The game is too damn fast. I think it would help refs on-ice performance if they also spent half their time watching screens.

[cheevers]

I really wish the NHL would release rulings on what the call would have been on plays like this after the fact. I don't think there was interference in this case but it would be nice to give teams a baseline on what is and isn't interference.

[CalgaryFan1988]

That wasn't goalie interference IMO, but an argument could definitely be made about why no whistle. Not sure how the ref didn't lose sight of the puck in that scramble.

[Always Earned Never Given]

Rewatching it again, they could have called a third infraction as Nylander falls on Ritter's stick so he has to let go of it and therefore cannot put the "paddle down" when there are tight net scrambles.

Side note: If Chucky's stick would have been flat on the ice on the goal line (he has the toe down), who knows what might have happened although he was on his backhand.

Normally though there should have been at least a Flames player behind Rittich skates parallel to goal line covering any loose puck.

P.S. I guess they haven'y played pond hockey in awhile!

[HighLifeMan]

Originally Posted by Benched

I didn’t see interference tonight. I wanted to. It was mayhem. It’d have saved our bacon. But IMO it wasn’t there and the no challenge was the right call.

I am curious how the following doesn't apply to Hyman in this scenario?

"an attacking
player, either by his positioning or by contact, impairs the goalkeeper’s
ability to move freely within his crease or defend his goal"

He is standing directly in the middle of Rittich's crease and not only his body, but also his stick prevents Rittich from having the ability to cleanly reach out and grab the loose puck.

[Flames0910]

In a game of inches, it's stupid that the rules are this arbitrary.

There were multiple infractions in the crease that "could" have been goalie interference but nobody knows where the line is anymore. Plus there's probably some degree of bias in the Toronto video room for the local team -- how could there not be? Then there's the whole question of whether the ref could see the puck, would have intended to blow the whistle, etc with a ref who apparently called all the penalties against the Flames in this game? It's absolutely mind-####ing bottling.

I think Ward should have challenged only because OT is also a coin flip. Flip the first coin and see if you end up with 2 points instead of 1, then see if the team rallies for the PK. Of course Ward didn't challenge because he's milquetoast.