Kadri Goal - Good or not?

[Craigo85]

I think this might settle things.

Click to read more...

 

[VinikToWinIt]

Obviously not, by the book.

MacKinnon was a good 40 feet from the bench when Kadri's feet touched the ice, and he wasn't yet off it when he received the puck.

That violates both the 5 foot rule and the black and white rule that the incoming player cannot touch the puck until the other player has exited.

People can complain that the Lightning did it too, that they would lose anyways, whatever. But if we're asking if the goal should have counted by the rule book, it's a cut-and-dry no.

People can vote ref standards and I won't take issue with that (they stopped calling anything in the third), but if anyone votes for the middle option they're just ignoring the reality of the rule.

 

[tarheelhockey]

It is objectively not a goal. There is no “ref standard” involved, because the call is not discretionary. Kadri touching the puck + MacKinnon still being on the ice = penalty

 

[Turbonium]

It is objectively not a goal. There is no “ref standard” involved, because the call is not discretionary. Kadri touching the puck + MacKinnon still being on the ice = penalty

Clearly it doesn't because there was no penalty. Maybe another few threads started about this will get the league to step in and review though.

 

[Garbageyuk]

NHL pulling strings to influence outcomes, as per usual. But like the guy said, this kind of shit has benefited Tampa before. Live by the refs, die by the refs, Tampa.

Idk how anyone can take the NHL seriously anymore.

 

[Arthur Morgan]

Rule book lately just seems like a guideline at this point. I thought an offside is an offside and too many men is too many men. the grey area is just too large

 

[avsfan9]

NHL pulling strings to influence outcomes, as per usual. But like the guy said, this kind of shit has benefited Tampa before. Live by the refs, die by the refs, Tampa.

Idk how anyone can take the NHL seriously anymore.

Take them seriously? These are human people making human errors. They are not going to catch everything. Like the coaches have said sloppy changes are made multiple times every single game. Only thing is this was on a game winning goal in ot. It is what it is, no different then if it happens in the first period with no goal. Hey…. Why don’t we use robot refs and robot players so no mistakes are made.

 

[Garbageyuk]

Take them seriously? These are human people making human errors. They are not going to catch everything. Like the coaches have said sloppy changes are made multiple times every single game. Only thing is this was on a game winning goal in ot. It is what it is, no different then if it happens in the first period with no goal. Hey…. Why don’t we use robot refs and robot players so no mistakes are made.

It’s incredibly naive to chalk it up to just human error. This is a business, they are going to influence things as they see fit. With how often these kinds of things are taking place, you’ll notice patterns pretty clearly if you aren’t biased. Like you said though; it is what it is. It’s just entertainment after all.

 

[The don godfather]

No goal period.

 

[tarheelhockey]

Clearly it doesn't because there was no penalty.

That’s like saying stick contact to the opponent’s face isn’t illegal if it’s not called.

The play was clear-cut illegal, that’s not even in question.

 

[Turbonium]

That’s like saying stick contact to the opponent’s face isn’t illegal if it’s not called.

The play was clear-cut illegal, that’s not even in question.

Okay, so then the refs need to call the entire game by the book without question no matter the situation. You think people whine about the Avs PP now, just wait. This is all rather comical considering this is a play that would go unnoticed had a goal not been scored because this rule is broken numerous times a game by both teams. Tampa players jump on the ice well before the 5 foot rule, I guess both teams get a penalty? But Tampa had 2 players do so, refs better call them each. Avs now have a 4 vs 3 PP in OT and surely no one would complain when they score there. The refs let several clear penalties go in this game, for both teams. They let the teams play and settle it on their own. The Avs showed up for OT, Tampa did not. Game, set...we'll hold off on match until tomorrow.

 

[Steven Toast]

Shouldn't have been a goal. But watching the final stretch of that game the refs weren't calling anything, including a pretty blatant trip on Kadri (i think) when he was in the slot.

 

[Avaholic29]

There’s a reason no Tampa players are complaining about it. One did say something though, mcdonagh said it was a nothing play that players do all the time.

 

[BigDaddyLurch]

...how many of these threads does this place need??...

 

[Connor McConnor]

Ngl Avs seem to be benefiting from a lot of questionable calls these playoffs. It’s almost like the NHL wants them to win! But no, that can’t be right because they are objective. It was clearly offside and now a clear too many men? Both deciding goals?

 

[High five Tom]

Definitely a goal. Tampa had 7 skaters on the ice when the goal was scored

 

[NyQuil]

There’s a reason no Tampa players are complaining about it.

Probably because the series isn't over and they don't want to piss off the officials.

 

[Puckstop40]

Ngl Avs seem to be benefiting from a lot of questionable calls these playoffs. It’s almost like the NHL wants them to win! But no, that can’t be right because they are objective. It was clearly offside and now a clear too many men? Both deciding goals?

Yes the offside goal was the series changing goal for the Avs. If that doesn’t happen, Edmonton in 3. This was too many men and cost the Lightning because they only had 7 people on the ice. Refalanche at its finest.

 

[Avaholic29]

Ngl Avs seem to be benefiting from a lot of questionable calls these playoffs. It’s almost like the NHL wants them to win! But no, that can’t be right because they are objective. It was clearly offside and now a clear too many men? Both deciding goals?

The “offside” goal that you oilers fans can’t seem to understand despite explanation, was a game tying first period goal of game 1 lmao. “Both deciding goals”…

 

[tarheelhockey]

Okay, so then the refs need to call the entire game by the book without question no matter the situation. You think people whine about the Avs PP now, just wait. This is all rather comical considering this is a play that would go unnoticed had a goal not been scored because this rule is broken numerous times a game by both teams. Tampa players jump on the ice well before the 5 foot rule, I guess both teams get a penalty? But Tampa had 2 players do so, refs better call them each. Avs now have a 4 vs 3 PP in OT and surely no one would complain when they score there. The refs let several clear penalties go in this game, for both teams. They let the teams play and settle it on their own. The Avs showed up for OT, Tampa did not. Game, set...we'll hold off on match until tomorrow.

You are still missing the issue here.

The 5 foot rule has nothing to do with it. This play involves a completely different rule:

“If in the course of making a substitution, either the player entering the game or the player retiring plays the puck or who checks or makes any physical contact with an opposing player while both players involved in the substitution are on the ice, then the infraction of “too many men on the ice” will be called.”

This is an automatic, non-discretionary call. Referees don’t just look this other way on this one, any more than they look the other way for high sticks or hand passes or things of that nature. This is called a penalty every single time they see it, and the reason it isn’t called more often is because the players know to actively avoid doing it.

In this case, the only explanation for the non-call is that the officials simply didn’t realize that Kadri’s substitution partner was still on the ice — and that’s an understandable miss, considering the two players were 30 feet apart by the time Kadri touched the puck.

There’s really nothing to argue about here. The rule is black and white, and outside of human error the enforcement is consistently 100%. It’s a penalty which was missed, end of story.

 

[WarriorofTime]

should have been too many men on the ice but I think the League office is over the Lightning and ready for a new blood champion...... well or the officials just goofed up

 

[GirardSpinorama]

There needs to be a 4th option. Good goal because by the rules, you cannot review or challenge a too many men to call back a goal.

 

[Holymakinaw]

I think this might settle things.

Well, what did the NHL say? I'll go with that.

 

[Turbonium]

You are still missing the issue here.

The 5 foot rule has nothing to do with it. This play involves a completely different rule:

“If in the course of making a substitution, either the player entering the game or the player retiring plays the puck or who checks or makes any physical contact with an opposing player while both players involved in the substitution are on the ice, then the infraction of “too many men on the ice” will be called.”

This is an automatic, non-discretionary call. Referees don’t just look this other way on this one, any more than they look the other way for high sticks or hand passes or things of that nature. This is called a penalty every single time they see it, and the reason it isn’t called more often is because the players know to actively avoid doing it.

In this case, the only explanation for the non-call is that the officials simply didn’t realize that Kadri’s substitution partner was still on the ice — and that’s an understandable miss, considering the two players were 30 feet apart by the time Kadri touched the puck.

There’s really nothing to argue about here. The rule is black and white, and outside of human error the enforcement is consistently 100%. It’s a penalty which was missed, end of story.

OK. Do you feel better now? They missed a call, one of dozens of missed calls from the game.

Ngl Avs seem to be benefiting from a lot of questionable calls these playoffs. It’s almost like the NHL wants them to win! But no, that can’t be right because they are objective. It was clearly offside and now a clear too many men? Both deciding goals?

Yes, a goal in game 1, period 1 of a 4 game sweep was certainly the deciding factor in the Avs winning that series. Amazing.

 

[Voight]

You would think at least in the playoffs you could challenge a goal in this situation (too many men)