Goalie interference or nah by Bennett?

[sinDer]

Probably. It was a missed call on cross-checking. It happens.

If that was a cross check, then they should call at least 20 penalties, each side, per game lol

 

[StammerHammer]

If that was a cross check, then they should call at least 20 penalties, each side, per game lol

Yes they should until the players quit doing it.

 

[He Is Knocking]

No Goalie interference just as the officials stated , just as the league stated. Coyle got himself in bad position, contact happens all the time with players jockeying for position over juicy pucks.

 

[goflyakite]

People are way too focused on whether or not it’s a cross check. Sure, most of the time a cross check of the power isn’t going to be called.

It’s the fact that it is any sort of contact that caused a player to go into the goalie.

It’s goaltender interference everyday. Especially when Florida gets a power play for causing a Boston player to go into Bob in the same series.

 

[YukonCornelius]

Swayman said prgress wasnt impeded, so Ill go with what the goalie said.

I mean, objectively that isn’t close to what he said at all.

 

[pb1300]

I mean, objectively that isn’t close to what he said at all.

It is literally the EXACT words that came out of his mouth.

"I dont think progress was impeded, I just think we could have prevented that..."

Now, if he knows he f'd up by saying what he did, and tried to backtrack after, then thats a different story.

 

[YukonCornelius]

It is literally the EXACT words that came out of his mouth.

"I dont think progress was impeded, I just think we could have prevented that..."

Now, if he knows he f'd up by saying what he did, and tried to backtrack after, then thats a different story.

Cool, now try listening to the whole quote.

“The fact is Coyle was pushed into me and I couldn’t play my position…”

 

[He Is Knocking]

Fans, players, coaches, shills in the media trying to lawyer themselves into future wins by complaining about unfair treatment, poor league decisions. Weak

 

[pb1300]

Cool, now try listening to the whole quote.

“The fact is Coyle was pushed into me and I couldn’t play my position…”

Cool, I guess you missed the part where I said "Now, if he knows he f'd up by saying what he did, and tried to backtrack after, then thats a different story."

But hey, since he corrected himself, all is good then.

Im sure then you believe what Bennett had to say then, about the Marchand play.

 

[YukonCornelius]

Cool, I guess you missed the part where I said "Now, if he knows he f'd up by saying what he did, and tried to backtrack after, then thats a different story."

But hey, since he corrected himself, all is good then.

Im sure then you believe what Bennett had to say then, about the Marchand play.

It was literally from the same quote you’re trying to use as a gotcha claiming Swayman said it wasn’t interference. Like literally the next sentence. He wasn’t backtracking on anything, you’re just too lazy to actually listen to something in its entirety.

 

[pb1300]

It was literally from the same quote you’re trying to use as a gotcha claiming Swayman said it wasn’t interference. Like literally the next sentence. He wasn’t backtracking on anything, you’re just too lazy to actually listen to something in its entirety.

I listened to the entirety thank you very much. Swayman said what he said, and backtracks with the Coyle comment afterwards.

Interpret it as you wish, I could care less.

 

[YukonCornelius]

I listened to the entirety thank you very much. Swayman said what he said, and backtracks with the Coyle comment afterwards.

Interpret it as you wish, I could care less.

Man that says even more about your comprehension skills.

 

[vildurson]

Easily gi in my opinion. NHL is really inconsistantant with these anyway so can not use previous situations from other cames for this.

 

[PensPlz]

No I don't really think you can argue this was fighting for a loose rebound, as when you do such, you make a play on the puck. He made a play on the body. It'd be a different story if he made a play on the stick, like lift it etc, but that body of work is literally not fighting for the puck, it was playing the body. And he shoved the body before the puck even arrived in a position to be played. So yea it still is GI. I agree the crosscheck isn't reviewable if they didn't see that, but that was not incidental contact, it was intent to push the player out of position, not making a play on the puck first

Also by rule of said wording, it's about incidental contact by attacker and goalie, not an attacker pushing a defender into goalie. Don't even need to slow down that clip to see the shove came before an attempted play on puck. This is not considered incidental play.

Since any crosschecks and interference on Coyle aren't reviewable you have to remove that from the play. You have to to assume that everything that went on between them was a legal hockey play.

So when you review the play, all you can think of that happened was 2 players were battling for position in and/or around the crease. There was a rebound. The defending player makes contact with the goalie because of the attacker player's attempt to get position (which you have to assume is a legal hockey play) and play the rebound.

That's not GI based on 69.7 Rebounds and Loose Pucks. If this same situation happens 1 second sooner, and the initial shot goes in, then it's absolutely no goal. But since it's a rebound contact is allowed.

And the wording is fine. I don't think it matters how the attacking player makes contact (whether directly or indirectly) in this rebound situation.

But the reality is, the call on the ice was good goal. That holds a lot of weight. This seems to be a big gray area of what is reviewable and what isn't, and a contact loophole on rebounds, where they would have probably just defaulted to the call on the ice regardless of what that call was. If they waved the goal off originally, and the Panthers challenge, they probably lose too.

 

[LaCarriere]

If that was a cross check, then they should call at least 20 penalties, each side, per game lol

I think people are saying a cross check was missed aren't quite on the mark. 9.5/10 times that play in itself would never be called for cross checking if it was just two skaters and no goalie. Even though it was to the numbers, it was pretty tame to be called cross checking on its own.

The simple argument is the goalie interference rule states that a defending player cannot be pushed, shoved or fouled into a goalie, if he is, its assumed as if the attacking player made contact with the goalie.

So while it may have not been cross checking (foul/penalty) under normal circumstances, it's hard to say the defender wasn't pushed/shoved into the goalie.

Whether or not the goalie had a reasonable chance at stopping the puck should have no bearing. Even if he had a 1% shot at a save, that was taken away when his defender was pushed/shoved into him.

Maybe not enough to warrant 2 minutes, but arguably enough to negate the goal.

My guess is the refs either saw the "weak" contact and because it wasn't aggressive enough to fall into the typical bounds of cross checking/roughing/hitting from behind, simply flubbed the call/rule, or simply missed the contact all together.

By the rule he was pretty clearly pushed into his own goalie, but the call on the ice carries a lot of weight, and with certain plays non reviewable, the refs have a lot of responsibility to get things right in the moment.

 

[Smif]

When a play is under review for goalie interference they might as well just flip a coin because I literally have no clue which way the call is going to go these days. It's an absolute mess that someone watching and playing the game for 40 years has no clue what call will be made.

 

[Ugene Magic]

Cool, now try listening to the whole quote.

“The fact is Coyle was pushed into me and I couldn’t play my position…”

Coyle was already in his way to start, so I don't know how a nudge was going to change anything. Coyle was in the blue paint and in the way without the push. His left leg/skate.

 

[TD Charlie]

Coyle was already in his way to start, so I don't know how a nudge was going to change anything. Coyle was in the blue paint and in the way without the push. His left leg/skate.

The push put Coyle literally on top of the goalie, who had no shot to get his right arm up and over.

 

[Ugene Magic]

The push put Coyle literally on top of the goalie, who had no shot to get his right arm up and over.

The puck was along the ice. Coyle was already in the way and Swayman wasn't in position to get over even without Coyle being on top of him.

 

[TD Charlie]

The puck was along the ice.

The rule is written so that if the goalie cannot make an attempt then it's called back. Who's to say if Swayman starts getting his stick over there that the shot doesn't get duffed, or Bennet doesn't try to lift it?

As long as there is more than a total 0 chance of Swayman getting there it should be called back.

 

[sinDer]

I think people are saying a cross check was missed aren't quite on the mark. 9.5/10 times that play in itself would never be called for cross checking if it was just two skaters and no goalie. Even though it was to the numbers, it was pretty tame to be called cross checking on its own.

The simple argument is the goalie interference rule states that a defending player cannot be pushed, shoved or fouled into a goalie, if he is, its assumed as if the attacking player made contact with the goalie.

So while it may have not been cross checking (foul/penalty) under normal circumstances, it's hard to say the defender wasn't pushed/shoved into the goalie.

Whether or not the goalie had a reasonable chance at stopping the puck should have no bearing. Even if he had a 1% shot at a save, that was taken away when his defender was pushed/shoved into him.

Maybe not enough to warrant 2 minutes, but arguably enough to negate the goal.

My guess is the refs either saw the "weak" contact and because it wasn't aggressive enough to fall into the typical bounds of cross checking/roughing/hitting from behind, simply flubbed the call/rule, or simply missed the contact all together.

By the rule he was pretty clearly pushed into his own goalie, but the call on the ice carries a lot of weight, and with certain plays non reviewable, the refs have a lot of responsibility to get things right in the moment.

Perfect post!

As a Panthers' fan, I was obviously fine withe the call. But had this goal been diasallowed, I would have been fine with the decision too.

 

[pockets321]

That was a weak cross check, Coyle went down pretty easy. I've seen worse go uncalled in the playoffs.

 

[Ugene Magic]

The rule is written so that if the goalie cannot make an attempt then it's called back. Who's to say if Swayman starts getting his stick over there that the shot doesn't get duffed, or Bennet doesn't try to lift it?

As long as there is more than a total 0 chance of Swayman getting there it should be called back.

His attempt at a save just literally happened a split second before. It literally just came off his pad/toe.

 

[TD Charlie]

His attempt at a save just literally happened a split second before. It literally just came off his pad/toe.

aaaand then he had a guy on top of him, thus he's unable to make a play on the shot that went in

 

[Ugene Magic]

That was a weak cross check, Coyle went down pretty easy. I've seen worse go uncalled in the playoffs.

It was awkward because he was on top of his goalie and he didn't want to hit him.