Post-Game Talk: WTF just happened? Oil win 4-3

[Bryanbryoil]

I was sure that we were going to get screwed one way or another.

 

[CycloneSweep]

A goal WASN'T scored though. The Oilers challenge showed the only reason the puck crossed the goal line was because Talbot’s pad was pushed into the net. If a goal had actually been scored then the game would have been tied. Again, on the original play time ran out. The only way time should have gone back on the clock is if a legitimate goal was scored. The fact that the puck crossed the line is irrelevant if the goal doesn’t count.

But it's not.

A goal was scored. It was then waived off because of interference.

 

[Porkleaker]

I think Talbot would've absolutely lost it and attacked a ref, probably why they made the right call for once. A livid goalie, swinging that big stick around is far more scary than any LA fan.

 

[Porkleaker]

But it's not.

A goal was scored. It was then waived off because of interference.

This is rocket science for some people. They should just go to bed before they hurt their brains.

 

[McTedi]

There is no exact rule for this situation. But with a bit of common sense and brain power we can figure it out.
2 seperate things happened .

1)
NHL Rule 38.7

In the event that a video replay shows a goal was scored prior to
the play being stopped, the Video Goal Judge will inform the Game Timekeeper and Official Scorer of the time of goal and the amount of playing time left to be reset on the game clock and penalty time clocks.

So by that rule when the NHL declares that the puck indeed crossed the line, the time is then reset to 9.8 seconds.

2) Goal is then auto reviewed for goaltender interference. For it to be reviewed for goaltender interference there has to be a goal called a good goal. When did that happen 9.8 seconds.

So when it was declared that the goal was to be waived off due to goaltender interference the game goes back to the state it was when the waived off goal was scored.

This isn't complicated or some conspiracy

Are you sure goal and GI reviews aren't complicated, the NHL has botched several this week and it has been a point of contention for awhile. Just saying

 

[Ritchie Valens]

Rule 38.5

I understand why there was time added on, which is 38.5. 38.2 is goal reviews and the circumstances under who initiates them.

I thought the discussion was what the ref said on ice in regards to who initiated the second review and challenge. The optics to me is the off ice official called the ref over to see if a goal had been scored. Then the war room said it's a goal, but we need to look at this for goalie interference.

At any rate, the refs verbiage of saying "coach's challenge initiated by the situation room" is what is confusing.

 

[CycloneSweep]

Are you sure goal and GI reviews aren't complicated, the NHL has botched several this week and it has been a point of contention for awhile. Just saying

The deciding part is complicated. What happened tonight was straight forward lol

 

[CycloneSweep]

I understand why there was time added on, which is 38.5. 38.2 is goal reviews and the circumstances under who initiates them.

I thought the discussion was what the ref said on ice in regards to who initiated the second review and challenge. The optics to me is the off ice official called the ref over to see if a goal had been scored. Then the war room said it's a goal, but we need to look at this for goalie interference.

At any rate, the refs verbiage of saying "coach's challenge initiated by the situation room" is what is confusing.

No. Roomer doesn't understand the difference between a goal not being scored and a goal being waived off. They are different things.

 

[snag]

A goal WASN'T scored though. The Oilers challenge showed the only reason the puck crossed the goal line was because Talbot’s pad was pushed into the net. If a goal had actually been scored then the game would have been tied. Again, on the original play time ran out. The only way time should have gone back on the clock is if a legitimate goal was scored. The fact that the puck crossed the line is irrelevant if the goal doesn’t count.

The. Puck. Crossed. The. Line.

Time was supposed to stop at that instant. What happened after that is irrelevant because it should not have happened.

 

[McTedi]

The deciding part is complicated. What happened tonight was straight forward lol

Still have yet to see the puck across the line but I guess I'll have to take their word for it.

 

[DaGap]

I understand why there was time added on, which is 38.5. 38.2 is goal reviews and the circumstances under who initiates them.

I thought the discussion was what the ref said on ice in regards to who initiated the second review and challenge. The optics to me is the off ice official called the ref over to see if a goal had been scored. Then the war room said it's a goal, but we need to look at this for goalie interference.

At any rate, the refs verbiage of saying "coach's challenge initiated by the situation room" is what is confusing.

Isnt it fun?
Because in the NHL infinite wisdom they decided to call RULE 38.5 COach's Challenge

However it can be initiated by the war room

 

[DaGap]

Still have yet to see the puck across the line but I guess I'll have to take their word for it.

How about talbot saying it was in?

 

[CycloneSweep]

In the final minute and OT goals are auto looked over for GI and Offside and if it looks like a maybe, a review is done automatically.

 

[snag]

How about talbot saying it was in?

Did he?

 

[Ritchie Valens]

No. Roomer doesn't understand the difference between a goal not being scored and a goal being waived off. They are different things.

Perhaps DaGap quoted me by mistake then. I responded to @48g90a138pts in regards to what the ref literally said word for word during the reviews.

 

[DaGap]

Did he?

 

[DaGap]

Perhaps DaGap quoted me by mistake then. I responded to @48g90a138pts in regards to what the ref literally said word for word during the reviews.

Probably still getting used to the quoting thing.

THe ref said it right on the ice. Its just stupid that how the NHL chooses to communicate to fans

 

[ZJuice]

So the Kings coach can stand up for his team (even though he was wrong based on the Caggs goal that was called back).. but our guy can’t after so many questionable calls against us??

 

[Ritchie Valens]

Isnt it fun?
Because in the NHL infinite wisdom they decided to call RULE 38.5 COach's Challenge

However it can be initiated by the war room

Holy hell, this is nuts. Only during Oilers games haha.

Well, at least I learned something new tonight. I thought only coaches could challenge for GI.

 

[McTedi]

How about talbot saying it was in?

You're missing the point, fans don't get to see the evidence of the puck crossing the line. The goal didn't count so it's a mute point so I will stop now.

 

[snag]

So the Kings coach can stand up for his team (even though he was wrong based on the Caggs goal that was called back).. but our guy can’t after so many questionable calls against us??

Like my father-in-law always says: Why the hell should you have it better than the rest of us?

 

[DaGap]

Holy hell, this is nuts. Only during Oilers games haha.

Well, at least I learned something new tonight. I thought only coaches could challenge for GI.

As someone who has officiated athigh levels i can tell you without a doubt the the wording and the way rules are laid out are written by lawyers not by someone who has played the game or watched it

 

[DaGap]

You're missing the point, fans don't get to see the evidence of the puck crossing the line. The goal didn't count so it's a mute point so I will stop now.

Uaually Gene post a picture a few hours later. Im guessing he's got a connection

 

[CycloneSweep]

Holy hell, this is nuts. Only during Oilers games haha.

Well, at least I learned something new tonight. I thought only coaches could challenge for GI.

Here is the full Coaches Challenge rile

The League will make available in all arenas, technology (either a
handheld tablet or a television or computer monitor) that will allow OnIce Officials, in conjunction with the NHL Situation Room, to view replays if, and only to the extent, a formal Coach’s Challenge has been initiated (or, in the final minute of play or in Overtime, a review by Hockey Operations is initiated). To the extent practical, the replays made available to the Officials on the ice will be the same replays that are being utilized by the NHL Situation Room. Once a Challenge has been initiated (or, in the final minute of play
or in Overtime, a review is initiated by Hockey Operations), the NHL Situation Room will immediately establish contact with the Referee (or Linesman) responsible for the call on the ice via the headset and will inquire and discuss with the Referee (or Linesman), prior to the Referee (or Linesman) examining any video, the following: (a) the Referee’s (or Linesman’s) “final” call on the ice; and (b) what the Referee (or Linesman) observed on the play. The on-ice call will then be reviewed simultaneously by the
appropriate On-Ice Officials at ice level and by Hockey Operations in the NHL Situation Video Room using any and all replays at their disposal. After reviewing the play and consulting with the NHL Situation Room, the appropriate On-Ice Officials will then make the “final” decision on whether to uphold or overturn the original call on the ice. Once the decision is made, the Referee will inform the Penalty Timekeeper/PA Announcer and will make the announcement on the ice.

 

[nabob]

The. Puck. Crossed. The. Line.

Time was supposed to stop at that instant. What happened after that is irrelevant because it should not have happened.

But the goal was called back...