GDT: HFBoards GDT | 1/21/19

Status
Not open for further replies.

koyvoo

Registered User
Nov 8, 2014
17,268
17,050
And now a second review on the play, this time for goaltender interference.
 

canucks20

Registered User
Oct 12, 2009
1,856
1,189
How the hell was that a goal? Only reason it went in was because Pavelski pushes Luongo's pad out of the way
 

Snakepit

Registered User
Nov 19, 2013
6,110
1,769
The puck was loose. Not sure how you could say that's GI.

Agreed. I could see the argument for Luongo getting pushed, but it was with a stick and they were playing a loose puck. Good call by the refs imo.

Get it back Panthers!
 
  • Like
Reactions: Kegsey

Kegsey

Defense be scared, Hertl coming.
Oct 20, 2011
5,149
2,987
Canada
How the hell was that a goal? Only reason it went in was because Pavelski pushes Luongo's pad out of the way

Are you serious? They were playing the puck. It's that black round thing that was sitting next to Luongo's pad.
 

Snakepit

Registered User
Nov 19, 2013
6,110
1,769
Yeah, my thinking is if Luongo was pushed by a body then it's interference, but the sticks were there playing the loose puck
 

canucks20

Registered User
Oct 12, 2009
1,856
1,189
Are you serious? They were playing the puck. It's that black round thing that was sitting next to Luongo's pad.

Yes the puck is loose. You can't push a goalies pad into the net to cause a goal. Luongo is holding the post when Pavelski pushes his pad causing Luongo to lose the post. The puck enters the net where Luongo's pad was. As a goalie that is clear interference
 

Kegsey

Defense be scared, Hertl coming.
Oct 20, 2011
5,149
2,987
Canada
Yes the puck is loose. You can't push a goalies pad into the net to cause a goal. Luongo is holding the post when Pavelski pushes his pad causing Luongo to lose the post. The puck enters the net where Luongo's pad was. As a goalie that is clear interference

They pushed the puck into the net dude. Luongo did not have the puck. I'm sorry if you don't understand the rules but that is not "clear interference." Even the other Panthers fan agrees it was the right call.
 

Snakepit

Registered User
Nov 19, 2013
6,110
1,769
They pushed the puck into the net dude. Luongo did not have the puck. I'm sorry if you don't understand the rules but that is not "clear interference." Even the other Panthers fan agrees it was the right call.

I'm not a Panthers fan, just cheering against the Sharks haha. But regardless I do agree, the Sharks shouldn't just not play a loose puck because it's next to a goalies pads
 

canucks20

Registered User
Oct 12, 2009
1,856
1,189
I'm not a Panthers fan, just cheering against the Sharks haha. But regardless I do agree, the Sharks shouldn't just not play a loose puck because it's next to a goalies pads

I agree to play the puck. But when the stick accidentally pushes Luongo's pad to change the outcome of the play that results in a goal, seems like interference
 

Snakepit

Registered User
Nov 19, 2013
6,110
1,769
I agree to play the puck. But when the stick accidentally pushes Luongo's pad to change the outcome of the play that results in a goal, seems like interference
I definitely see the argument, and wouldn't have been upset if they decided to call it that way either. Just not clear enough to say it's 100% either way
 

canucks20

Registered User
Oct 12, 2009
1,856
1,189
I definitely see the argument, and wouldn't have been upset if they decided to call it that way either. Just not clear enough to say it's 100% either way

I don't think anyone knows what goalie interference is in the NHL haha. I just know as a goalie I'd be furious if they counted that. Anyway, hope for a good finish to the game
 

koyvoo

Registered User
Nov 8, 2014
17,268
17,050
Yandle early in the 4:00 min PP. FLA nice opportunity to go up by two on another full PP.
 

Snakepit

Registered User
Nov 19, 2013
6,110
1,769
And another 9 seconds later.

I guess that's one way to kill a 4 min penalty quickly
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad