Reimer makes contact with Nash outside crease, ruled goalie interference

[ichabod13]

i think i might be on to something here.........in the play with reimer, his left foot was kicked(?) out from under him. THAT may have been the reason for the interference call.
i would say it was a pretty weak reason, but a reason none the less.
did they explain WHY they called it interference?

 

[Zybalto]

Imagine that was for the cup? What was Nash supposed to do there?

The league seems determined to create another foot in the crease controversy for the playoffs.

How big a problem was this before?

 

[dechire]

Reimer was in the crease. But even if he hadn't been in the crease it still could have been GI. The rule includes contact inside and outside of the crease.

 

[WesMcCauley]

OP has a point because similar situations has been ruled good goals before. Goalie also skates into him and the defensemen gives him a little push against the goalie.
Just like the Carolina goal against NYR and in other games this season similar situations gets called differently. Problem right now for me is that when situations like these happens, i have no clue what call will be made. There is no consistency and thats a problem imo. Specially when they review them! Why review them if there is no consistency?
They fixed it when it comes to scoring with your skate. You really have to kick it for it to be ruled a no goal now. Do something similar when it comes to goalie interference so its much easier to be consistent.

 

[hockeykicker]

Imagine that was for the cup? What was Nash supposed to do there?

The league seems determined to create another foot in the crease controversy for the playoffs.

How big a problem was this before?

it arguably prevented the caps from a ecf appearence

 

[Frosty415]

he's still inside his crease?

misleading title.

 

[Zybalto]

it arguably prevented the caps from a ecf appearence

Just brutal. He should have just slashed the keeper and it might have had a chance to count. I'm not sure what a goal is anymore.

 

[SladeWilson23]

I do not understand this rule.

This imo should have been a good goal because Nash was forced into the crease by the Panther defender. I defended the Dwight King goal from the 2014 SCF, and this particular play tonight is not much different. Therefore, I believe the refs got this one wrong.

This should be a good goal simply because the Hurricane player got to the area in front of the crease before Raanta got to the top of the crease. The onus here is on Raanta to avoid contact with the Hurricane player.

 

[Individual 1]

It really looks like Nash's right skate makes contact with Reimer's left skate outside of the crease. Not to mention the defender is pushing him towards Reimer

 

[Barrie22]

This imo should have been a good goal because Nash was forced into the crease by the Panther defender. I defended the Dwight King goal from the 2014 SCF, and this particular play tonight is not much different. Therefore, I believe the refs got this one wrong.



This should be a good goal simply because the Hurricane player got to the area in front of the crease before Raanta got to the top of the crease. The onus here is on Raanta to avoid contact with the Hurricane player.

No it is not up to the goalie to avoid contact. It is up to the player to not put himself in a position to interfere with the goalie while he is inside his crease.

Shocking to hear but goalies are allowed to move freely within the entire blue paint area. Without any part of the opposing teams player hindering that movement.

 

[Syckle78]

What a horrible thread.

 

[A1LeafNation]

I do not understand this rule.

That was less than 2 steamboats. Good call.

-HFboards.

 

[karnige]

Imo it should be a play on.

 

[SladeWilson23]

No it is not up to the goalie to avoid contact. It is up to the player to not put himself in a position to interfere with the goalie while he is inside his crease.

Shocking to hear but goalies are allowed to move freely within the entire blue paint area. Without any part of the opposing teams player hindering that movement.

The Hurricanes player was outside the crease. The goalie was able to move freely in the crease.

Regardless, this thread is about the goal tonight, not one from last year.

 

[Master P]

Karma for the Tampa no goal earlier this season.

 

[Lyons71]

I don't have a problem with the call. Nash wasn't driven into him by the dman. He tried to back up and bumped the goalie who was in the crease.

All that being said, if this were edm and ducks, it would be a good goal.

 

[McRpro]

Silly fans. Trying to make sense of the NHL's interpretation of goaltender interference.

 

[Alluckks]

it arguably prevented the caps from a ecf appearence

Are you posting this video to say that you agree with the call in the OP or are you saying you disagree with the call from tonight? Or is this just grandstanding for you complaining about a 2014 call?

 

[rhinoshawarma]

I do not understand this rule.

This is interference imo and clear as day. Good call

This is also interference and they missed it.

yep

This is not interference he gets pushed in by Stepan.

You win some and you lose some. Evens out eventually. Sucks but nothing more can be done

 

[Savant]

Coach's Challenge: NYR @ CAR - 9:04 of Third Period

Sorry idk how to embed.

I was at that game. Raanta went insane afterwards. Moreso than in the video

 

[Chimpradamus]

How big was this problem before? Well, from the Stanley Cup finals, with a goal that was very, very important:


This was called a good goal, no goalie interference. Just lol. Having an opponent draped all over the goalie was fine before at least.

 

[tomobson]

These type of calls are 50/50 and it sucks that the league hasn't done anything about it yet.

 

[mcdraividmoto]

Am Oilers fan, can confirm its goalie interference.

Lol yeah just like Game 4 vs Anaheim where they called it a good goal because a very very small part of his body was outside the crease. The league is full of it.

 

[Kane One]

This is also interference and they missed it.

It wasn’t simply missed.
1. It was missed on the ice
2. It was challenged and confirmed
3. The NHL after the game confirmed the call
4. They told Vigneault his head was outside the crease.

I’d have less of problem if it was missed. This is pure incompetence.

 

[TGWL]

Am Oilers fan, can confirm its goalie interference.

But you didn't confirm...