Montreal defeats Ottawa 4 games to 2

Status
Not open for further replies.

JustAHabFan

Registered User
Apr 8, 2008
7,696
2,680
Yes, Price was unbelievable tonight. One of the best goaltending performances I've seen in the playoffs so far. But there is no way he would have made the save. He thought he had it covered, and so did the defence. The whistle did not change the outcome of that play in any way, that puck would have ended up in the net regardless.

So scoring after the whistle is allowed now?:help:
 

Canadienna

Registered User
Jan 27, 2015
11,702
15,768
Dew drops and rainforest
This is like saying that no play that isn't reversed should ever be reviewed.

No, he is saying in that case the puck was going into the net from the initial shot, where as this one wasn't going in the net unless Pageau shot it in and Carey Price and the 2 D men we had there didn't stop him...

Do you understand now?
 

Micklebot

Moderator
Apr 27, 2010
53,120
30,338
The Whistle has already been blowed before Pageau took the shot. Review or not it's a no goal.

All depends on how they define continuous play. To me, the whistle didn't change anything. should have been a goal. I fine if you disagree, but there's definitely room for review.
 

Rhiessan71

Just a Fool
Feb 17, 2003
11,618
24
Guelph, Ont
Visit site
Sens need to be given credit for making a series out of it after being down 3-0 but the end was inevitable.

It was only a matter of time before Price stole one.

To all the arrogant Sens fans (you know who you are) hoping, wishing and gloating over a first round match up vs the Habs...and believe me you deserve this and then some...suck it!!!

To the rest of the Sens fans that didn't get ahead of themselves and engaged in good spirited debates. Kudo's to you. You have a team to be proud of and a team that looks very good for the future.
 

Athletique_Canadien

Registered User
Dec 13, 2005
1,900
86
Halifax, NS
Sorry but a Pageau non-goal is about as legit an excuse as was Gretzky's missed high stick on Gilmour in 1993. You don't lose a series based solely on a blown call.

But if it makes people happy to go on about it, have fun. It still doesn't change the outcome.
 

Duffman955

Registered User
Mar 4, 2010
14,612
3,891
They also scored 6 in the two previous elimination games.

Good for them. Going down 3-0 is a difficult hill to climb. They should blame themselves for getting into this situation.

And having 1 debatable goal in an elimination game is usually not enough to win. Good effort though.
 

harrisb

Registered User
Oct 6, 2009
2,217
952
epic save, kinda similar to the one vs SJ earlier this season.




Looked better than it was. Turris didn't get full wood on it nor did he elevate like he should have. Price actually missed it and it hit his stick knocking it from his hand, fairly lucky actually.
 

kk87

Registered User
Feb 12, 2015
5,334
2,114
Waterloo, ON
I don't know if this has been brought up yet, but here's another example of a goal counting, even though it's scored after a whistle. In this instance, the whistle was completely arbitrary as there was no reason for it to be blown. It didn't change the outcome of the game in any way, but it's another interesting case nonetheless.

[Yt]E77WusrLTug[/MEDIA]
 

Micklebot

Moderator
Apr 27, 2010
53,120
30,338
So you can shoot and score after the whistle?

By the rules, so long as it's part of a continuous play, and the whistle didn't affect the outcome of the goal crossing the line.

I would argue that Pageau's net drive after a shot is definitely part of a continuous play. Whether the whistle caused the players to let up could be an issue, but Pageau did have his man beat, and the other d was tangled up with another player.

All I'm saying is it was worth taking a look at, and the league did itself a great disservice by not doing so.
 

Whitesnake

If you rebuild, they will come.
Jan 5, 2003
89,202
36,190
Thanks. Pageau is clearly past the d before the whistle, Price doesn't seem to have a clue where the puck is imo, as he's trying to squeeze it, not play it.

Well Petry doesn'T play Pageau too hard when hearing the whistle, and we don't have Price face up front as he might have very well saw the puck fall out but kept his head straight. We don't see the eyes. Tough to determine. And again, not enough proof that you reverse the call for that. You might reverse the call if a puck is behind a goalie going in the direction of the net while the goalie thinks he has.....but you still can't prove he's not going to make a sudden move without a whistle. Not conclusive enough.
 

DanZ

Registered User
Mar 6, 2008
14,495
31
...happened dozens of times this year, including a few times in the playoffs...none were reviewed...

What's your point? I didn't say it should be reviewed, I said the refs took away a goal, which they did. The fact that it supposedly happens all the time doesn't change that.
 

Micklebot

Moderator
Apr 27, 2010
53,120
30,338
Sorry but a Pageau non-goal is about as legit an excuse as was Gretzky's missed high stick on Gilmour in 1993. You don't lose a series based solely on a blown call.

But if it makes people happy to go on about it, have fun. It still doesn't change the outcome.

No but you can certainly lose a game.
 

SenzZen

RIP, GOAT
Jan 31, 2011
16,896
5,952
Ottawa
No, he is saying in that case the puck was going into the net from the initial shot, where as this one wasn't going in the net unless Pageau shot it in and Carey Price and the 2 D men we had there didn't stop him...

Do you understand now?

There's something you're failing to understand.

We all know what happened because we've watched it over and over.

The ref didn't even see a puck lying loose next to Price- so the least he could do is go to the war room to have them confirm what happened.

The result would have been the same. Just because the VAN clip shows an instance where the official's ruling was overturned- and how that applies- it's still reviewable.
 

chuck1984

Registered User
Jan 13, 2012
318
0
To the people calling for the refs heads, did you watch the entire series? I`ve never seen so much interference and or obstruction going uncalled but then call it on the other team. E-VE-RY TIME Montreal would try to jump & chase they`d get physically stopped by the Sens D, but if the Montreal Dman did that he`d get 2 minutes. Montreal had A LOT of bad calls go against them.

The better team won, period.
 

Whitesnake

If you rebuild, they will come.
Jan 5, 2003
89,202
36,190
I don't know if this has been brought up yet, but here's another example of a goal counting, even though it's scored after a whistle. In this instance, the whistle was completely arbitrary as there was no reason for it to be blown. It didn't change the outcome of the game in any way, but it's another interesting case nonetheless.

[Yt]E77WusrLTug[/MEDIA]

And I believe it was the wrong call. Was the wrong thing to do to blow the whistle for sure....no reason whatsoever. But how do you interpret how the players would have played the puck would have been exactly the same without a whistle? You see Gibson totally giving out on the play. Call makes no sense to me.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->