San Jose Sharks get jobbed again.

[Yeti of the Flow]

What rule did Rask break? Speaking of absurdity.

 

[Sheppy]

Several high sticks... Funny because you got multiple high stick penalties.
I think you need to review how the instigator penalty works - because Braun defends himself does wash the instigator.
The linesmen will always put the net back on when play goes to the other end - bit suspicious when they don't on this occasion.
Rask broke the rules, but that's ok because he 'outsmarted' the team... Right...

Missed calls are one thing, and I can deal with. But the absurdity to claim it evened out because a No-Goal call in the first was reviewed and did not have conclusive evidence to overturn is ridiculous.

Almost as ridiculous as one of the most penalised teams in the league this season, somehow behaving themselves so well that they only took delay of game penalties.

- The puck was on a 45 degree angle, logic says that it was in the net, probably by an inch or two, honestly. Wrong.
- It was absolutely clearly a third man in penalty that didn't get called. If they called Wagner for the instigator, he would have gotten 2-5-10, they didn't. If they called Dillon for third man in, it would have washed that penalty, thus, even out the calls which in the end is how it ended up. Wrong again.
- What rule did Rask break? He doesn't have to put the net back on. Wrong again.

 

[Sheppy]

What rule did Rask break? Speaking of absurdity.

I guess he has to remove his glove and blocker and say "hey, you know what. I'll put the net back on!"

 

[Anomie2029]

What rule did Rask break? Speaking of absurdity.

Rule 63: "A minor penalty shall be imposed on any player who delays the game by deliberately displacing a goal post from its normal position. The Referee shall stop play immediately when the offending team gains control of the puck."

 

[Anomie2029]

I guess he has to remove his glove and blocker and say "hey, you know what. I'll put the net back on!"

In the third period, not the OT. It's up to the official to put it back on.

 

[Yeti of the Flow]

Rule 63: "A minor penalty shall be imposed on any player who delays the game by deliberately displacing a goal post from its normal position. The Referee shall stop play immediately when the offending team gains control of the puck."

When did this happen? Please. When did this happen? I mean, it's a completely bogus claim, so I'd love to know what you'll reply with.

 

[PatriceBergeronFan]

Except linesmen always put the net back on when play is down the other end. Even then it is arguable that Kane was pushed into the net.

But funny that Rask pushing the net off is ok too without penalty.

"Always". Oh yes?

 

[Sheppy]

In the third period, not the OT. It's up to the official to put it back on.

When he went post to post to make a save and the net came off? Didn't seem like he knocked it off on purpose there. Hell, San Jose players didn't think so either. No argument from any of them.

Keep going. You're treading water like a champ.

 

[Tw1ster]

When he went post to post to make a save and the net came off? Didn't seem like he knocked it off on purpose there. Hell, San Jose players didn't think so either. No argument from any of them.

Keep going. You're treading water like a champ.

Cooch and Rask even had a good laugh about the shot and save attempt.

There was some rough calls in the game but now we’re reaching

 

[VoluntaryDom]

THE. REV. WAVED. THE. GOAL. OFF.
THE CALL ON THE ICE WAS NO GOAL

yeah sounds like the refs blew that one

 

[PB37]

yeah sounds like the refs blew that one

He's wrong. Call on the ice was a goal and it was confirmed later by officials. Watch the ref behind the net point towards the goal, indicating he saw it go in and then give the wash out sign for the high stick as a Shark was complaining about it.

 

[rocketdan9]

The fact that Jack Edwards said the Bruins got away with one here tells you everything you need to know.

who the F cares what he thinks?

 

[Yackiberg8]

He's wrong. Call on the ice was a goal and it was confirmed later by officials. Watch the ref behind the net point towards the goal, indicating he saw it go in and then give the wash out sign for the high stick as a Shark was complaining about it.

As someone who lost what would’ve been a nice parlay win due to this, the high stick goal counting is sickening.

Clear high stick then puck goes in, how is that a goal?

 

[Knotty Moog]

Maybe if Kane didn’t give up like a child in overtime he may have been able to stop McAvoy from scoring

 

[Trocity]

I'm sure the league will iron out some of the "what is and isn't reviewable" issues.

Maybe.















Probably not.

 

[scorpiorising]

Yes?

Theres literally no point in responding to you. Move along

 

[HockeyMomx2]

Except they didn’t lose a goal and they added more than one.



And imagine Jack Edwards/PBF if the officiating was on the other side of the coin for this one.

Ummmmm it was pretty horrific on both sides, throughout the entirety of the game. It was exactly as Marchy described it, ' a shit show'.

 

[HockeyMomx2]

Because Duchene once scored a goal after being five feet offside and the nhl was embarrassed . Make a big enough fuss and we can have reviews for everything .

This happened almost 3 years to the day that one of my kids had lost a state final that same exact way. It almost made it hurt a little less for them, seeing it happen at that level too.

 

[Patty Ice]

Theres literally no point in responding to you. Move along

Any of you Bruins fans want to account for this guy? What's his deal?

 

[Lyons71]

Let’s make all high sticks reviewable. Let’s make every penalty call too. We need more video review.

 

[tiburon12]

I'm laughing at this thread where people are equating Boston's no goal in the first, which was reviewed by Toronto and ruled to be inconclusive, to the missed call on the Wagner, which wasnt even reviewable. The hole in the rules preventing referees from reviewing a high stick is not at all equal to league offices reviewing a goal and determining it was inconclusive.

From a Sharks fans perspective, it's infuriating that two calls, regardless of whether they called correctly within the rules, went against us in critical moments of the game. It's a game where we sucked for like 10 mins and dug a 3-0 hole, only to dominate the remainder of the game and come back to lead on the back of a f***ing Joe Thornton hat trick. It had the makings of a legendary Sharks game, but those hopes were dashed thanks to a missed call and shitty rule.

 

[BruinLVGA]

who the F cares what he thinks?

There's regularly entire threads complaining about Edwards on the main boards, but all of a sudden he now becomes the gold standard for judging plays.
#miraclesdohappen

 

[ijuka]

Everything should be reviewable, honestly. Either have everything reviewable or don't review at all.

 

[18leafsfan18]

Basically with both calls the refs just screwed up big time (High Stick / OT Net off)

All rules were followed, but the refs should have blown the high stick dead before the goal and they should have replaced the net in overtime.

Can't be mad at the Bruins for using those screw ups to their advantage, every other team would have done the same.