Criteria to overturn a goal (Goalie Interference)

[Outl4w]

The tkachuk play and the two from last night were completely different scenarios. Sorry you are too upset to realize that.

im not mad. Bob initiated contact on byour video. Was there contact after perhaps but the rules says opposing had to initiate for it to be a penalty if the goalie is outside the crease. Bob helmet hits little Tony's rear outside his crease. The Cirelli screen last night had the panthers player moving him in the crease like Tkachuk on vas except Tkachuk interfered with the play more. It is simple make a clear definition and call it every season and playoff the same for every team. If you can't touch the goalie period then enforce it. If the opposing player doesn't Initiate contact but the goalie does outside the crease it is a goal according the rule.

 

[Chaos2k7]

im not mad. Bob initiated contact on byour video. Was there contact after perhaps but the rules says opposing had to initiate for it to be a penalty if the goalie is outside the crease. Bob helmet hits little Tony's rear outside his crease. The Cirelli screen last night had the panthers player moving him in the crease like Tkachuk on vas except Tkachuk interfered with the play more. It is simple make a clear definition and call it every season and playoff the same for every team. If you can't touch the goalie period then enforce it. If the opposing player doesn't Initiate contact but the goalie does outside the crease it is a goal according the rule.

When you are the only one arguing the point, you may be wrong.

Many TB fans can clearly see the calls were correctly made, and have said as such.

 

[chaser17]

I kinda agree with what Cooper said. Crease battles and a little bit of incidental contact with the goalie used to be the name of the game. Now they call the goal off if you even blow on the goalie.

 

[Outl4w]

I kinda agree with what Cooper said. Crease battles and a little bit of incidental contact with the goalie used to be the name of the game. Now they call the goal off if you even blow on the goalie.

Exactly the rules didn't change, but the way they call it changes from ref to ref, night to night, and team to team. The league should pick how they want to enforce and regulate goalie interference, write the rule to match it exactly, call goalie interference consistently across the league, regular season, and playoffs,

 

[Beezeral]

I kinda agree with what Cooper said. Crease battles and a little bit of incidental contact with the goalie used to be the name of the game. Now they call the goal off if you even blow on the goalie.

This isn’t true at all. Over time the tweaks to the rule allowed MORE freedom inside the crease, not less. Either way. OP is loud wrong here. His team lost. And lost in emphatic fashion. He can’t come to grips with that so he’s complaining about two calls that aren’t even controversial.

 

[GeeoffBrown]

I think this goal is just 50/50 depending on how the situation room is feeling.

Wait 5 minutes flip a coin on both interference and kicking motion

 

[ToDavid]

Having just seen the clip now, this one doesn't seem particularly controversial.

 

[Cup or Bust]

The whole goalie interference rule is complete trash and I disagree with most of the calls to be honest.

 

[WATTAGE4451]

Having just seen the clip now, this one doesn't seem particularly controversial.

It could have gone either way with how inconsistent the nhl is on how sometimes it takes very blatant contact to reverse and othertimes it takes barely touching them. No consistency.

The real travesty is the way the rules are challenge and if you lose delay of game penalty. Just go to football system where you have set number of challenges. Maybe 2 per game. This having to be afraid to challenge a game changing goal because if yoh lose challenge could setup and autlmatic loss is complete stupidity.

 

[SaintMorose]

Bobrovsky can’t occupy a space that is legally his due to Duclair standing there, that’s literally impairing Bobrovsky from moving to a position he needs to. The reason why Bobrovsky never has his glove moving to make a initial save is because he can’t, because Duclair’s positioning impairs him from doing so.

100% goalie interference.

Who determines that he needs to be there? Certainly not Bobrovsky or he would have moved into Duclair and there would be contact which would be goalie interference 100%, but that's not where he wanted to be for the save.

And the glove point is ridiculous, Bob is late with the glove because he choses to put his glove into Duclair's back it never comes into contact with Duclair when he starts moving to make the save (again would be goalie interference 100% if Duclair initiated or obstructed on the save) until after the puck has hit him and is loose in the crease.

 

[SaintMorose]

Duclair has no right to occupy space inside the crease before the arrival of the puck. That's what happens here. Duclair establishes his position in the crease, the shot comes in and bob is impeded in his ability to make a save because of duclair's foot blocking his glove. This wasn't complicated.

The glove doesn't hit Duclair when making the save that would be goalie interference, it hits Duclair when attempting to cover a loose puck which is losing a battle for a loose puck.

 

[Beezeral]

The glove doesn't hit Duclair when making the save that would be goalie interference, it hits Duclair when attempting to cover a loose puck which is losing a battle for a loose puck.

the issue is that he had established a position INSIDE the crease prior to the arrival of the puck.

 

[Chaos2k7]

The glove doesn't hit Duclair when making the save that would be goalie interference, it hits Duclair when attempting to cover a loose puck which is losing a battle for a loose puck.

The interference called has nothing to do with the intial save, nor are rebounds exempt from also being interfered with. Duke literally pulls his glove hand away while trying to smother the puck after the save he had already made.