gumgum
Registered User
- Oct 15, 2017
- 772
- 510
was it in the crease when the puck went in or not? and does it matter? according to hull, the rule had been changed before then.
A couple decades too late for this discussion.
yah it was in the crease and yah it should not have been a goal but no it was not overturned. buffalo woulda lost game 7 anyways so the pain happened quicker
A couple decades too late for this discussion.
You're likely thinking of this article, where Hull says the league changed the specific clause in the rule that dealt with players having control of the puck in the crease, rather than the crease rule itself. I don't have any evidence that this isn't true, though if someone could find some documentation of what the rule said, and a record of changes to the rule, that would help.why did hull lie and say the rule was changed before that goal? i have seen an interview where he said this
1999 wasn't 20 years ago.
yeah, that would be coolYou're likely thinking of this article, where Hull says the league changed the specific clause in the rule that dealt with players having control of the puck in the crease, rather than the crease rule itself. I don't have any evidence that this isn't true, though if someone could find some documentation of what the rule said, and a record of changes to the rule, that would help.
Oh God, that goal called back on Boston was the stupidest thing ever. Shame on the NHL for that.Boston probably lost a playoff series in 1998 when they had an overtime goal called back that would have given them a 2-1 series lead. If you want to see a coach as mad as I've ever seen then watch Pat Burns' reaction after that goal was called back. Gretzky criticized the rule in the 1997 playoffs even though it benefitted his team, the Rangers at one point.