GDT: 11/2/17 - 7:30PM EDT - New York Rangers vs Tampa Bay

Bolt 45

Registered User
Oct 19, 2015
1,598
819
They blew the call on the ice, and did not find enough evidence in the video review to overturn it. I don't think it was a conspiracy against us kind of thing. We need to play better and not let it come down to a blown call.
I agree we still should have won the game, and had enough time to. I'm not blaming the loss on the officials. But it was multiple bad calls, one of which cost us a goal, and I don't see why they shouldn't be called out on it.
 

Sky04

Registered User
Jan 8, 2009
29,131
18,233
I agree we still should have won the game, and had enough time to. I'm not blaming the loss on the officials. But it was multiple bad calls, one of which cost us a goal, and I don't see why they shouldn't be called out on it.

Because people only whine about reffing when it doesn't benefit them, people whine about every little thing but don't say a word when their team gets away with it. Do you file a complaint when the refs missed a blatant trip by one of our players? I mean, can't have it both ways right?

I'd rather have reffing as it is then have everything mirco-analyzed like the stupid offside by 0.00001mm review.
 

Bolt 45

Registered User
Oct 19, 2015
1,598
819
Because people only whine about reffing when it doesn't benefit them, people whine about every little thing but don't say a word when their team gets away with it. Do you file a complaint when the refs missed a blatant trip by one of our players? I mean, can't have it both ways right?

I'd rather have reffing as it is then have everything mirco-analyzed like the stupid offside by 0.00001mm review.
I get angry about the reffing in games between two teams I couldn't care less about. I don't want the game micro-analysed either, but the way GI is called/enforced in particular needs to be changed. It's a sham, and they get it wrong more often than not. Of the top of my head Washington and Chicago have both been absolutely jobbed by it in the playoffs, with Washington getting hosed in a Game 7. It's a joke.
 

MattM92

Registered User
Dec 8, 2010
6,925
516
FL
From the 2017-18 NHL Rulebook:

Interference on the Goalkeeper - This rule is based on the premise that an attacking player’s position, whether inside or outside the crease, should not, by itself, determine whether a goal should be allowed or disallowed. In other words, goals scored while attacking players are standing in the crease may, in appropriate circumstances be allowed. Goals should be disallowed only if: (1) 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; or (2) an attacking player initiates intentional or deliberate contact with a goalkeeper, inside or outside of his goal crease. Incidental contact with a goalkeeper will be permitted, and resulting goals allowed, when such contact is initiated outside of the goal crease, provided the attacking player has made a reasonable effort to avoid such contact. The rule will be enforced exclusively in accordance with the on-ice judgement of the Referee(s), but may be subject to a Coach’s Challenge (see Rule 78.7).

Does Dumont standing in the crease at Lundqvist's 2'o'clock really impair his ability to make a save to his left? There was extremely minimal contact, if any at all. It was a bad call on the ice and a bad call on the review. No doubt about it.

Source: http://www.nhl.com/nhl/en/v3/ext/rules/2017-2018-NHL-rulebook.pdf Rule 69.1
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sila v Kucherove

TheDaysOf 04

[ 2 6 ] [ 4 ]
Jun 23, 2007
53,074
22,909
NJ






There were some fines handed out after last night's game.


Stammer squirts water towards NYRs bench - $5k fine

Nathan Horton (2011) squirts water at fans and then throws bottle at them in the stands - $2.5k fine

The max fine doubled in the new CBA, but still....

The discipline handed out in this league will always confuse me
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad