Jump to content
The Official Site of the Vancouver Canucks
Enter Search Term. Use arrows to navigate between autocomplete results. If no results appear, use Enter to do a full site search.
Forum Closure ×
Canucks Community
Forum Closure

CDSF: (C1) Nashville Predators vs. (WC2) Colorado Avalanche | Predators win series 4-2

-Vintage Canuck-

2018 Stanley Cup Playoffs | Round 1   

79 members have voted

  1. 1. Who will win the series?

    • Predators in 4
      20
    • Predators in 5
      35
    • Predators in 6
      15
    • Predators in 7
      0
    • Avalanche in 4
      0
    • Avalanche in 5
      0
    • Avalanche in 6
      4
    • Avalanche in 7
      3

This poll is closed to new votes

  • Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.
  • Poll closed on 04/14/2018 at 07:00 PM

Recommended Posts

  • -Vintage Canuck- changed the title to CDSF: (C1) Nashville Predators vs. (WC2) Colorado Avalanche | Predators lead series 3-1
BeefcakeBo Canucks Rookie

BeefcakeBo

Posted
Posted

I have no idea how the nhl is such a joke on goalie interference calls. You figure a professional bunch of guys that have played hockey their whole life could figure that out. Like a bar full of sloshed dudes can figure it out watching sportsnet replays in like 30 seconds. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
mll Canucks All-Star

mll

Posted
Posted

This is the NHL's explanation or rather non explanation.  It's even more incomprehensible when watching the video they posted at the same time.  The commentators kept on explaining how Rinne was in the paint and that it's Comeau that knocked the puck off Rinne's pad.  Their take was that the goal had to be called back.

 

Link to the NHL video here:

https://www.nhl.com/news/nashville-predators-colorado-avalanche-game-4-situation-room/c-298113132?tid=277729160

At 11:01 of the third period in the Predators/Avalanche game, Nashville requested a Coach's Challenge to review whether Colorado's Blake Comeau interfered with Nashville goaltender Pekka Rinne prior to Alexander Kerfoot's goal.

After reviewing all available replays and consulting with the Referee, the Situation Room confirmed no goaltender interference infractions occurred before the puck crossed the goal line.

Therefore, the original call stands - good goal Colorado Avalanche.

Since the Coach's Challenge did not result in the original call being overturned, the Nashville Predators forfeit their time-out.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Apple Juice Canucks First-Line

Apple Juice

Posted
Posted
5 hours ago, mll said:

This is the NHL's explanation or rather non explanation.  It's even more incomprehensible when watching the video they posted at the same time.  The commentators kept on explaining how Rinne was in the paint and that it's Comeau that knocked the puck off Rinne's pad.  Their take was that the goal had to be called back.

 

Link to the NHL video here:

https://www.nhl.com/news/nashville-predators-colorado-avalanche-game-4-situation-room/c-298113132?tid=277729160

At 11:01 of the third period in the Predators/Avalanche game, Nashville requested a Coach's Challenge to review whether Colorado's Blake Comeau interfered with Nashville goaltender Pekka Rinne prior to Alexander Kerfoot's goal.

After reviewing all available replays and consulting with the Referee, the Situation Room confirmed no goaltender interference infractions occurred before the puck crossed the goal line.

Therefore, the original call stands - good goal Colorado Avalanche.

Since the Coach's Challenge did not result in the original call being overturned, the Nashville Predators forfeit their time-out.

 

Sounds like a load of baloney to me to be honest. It's the same situation where if a player pushes a goalie into the net with the puck underneath the goalie, it's called no goal.

 

Even if the puck was moving in the direction of the net, if Comeau didn't push Rinne's pad, Rinne would've felt the puck on his leg and would've covered the puck up and no goal would've occurred. The rules of goalie interference makes it clear. When a goalie is in their crease, or blue paint, it's their ice and any infraction that occurs between a player and a goalie which interferes with the goalie on making a save, that's goalie interference. No other way around it. 

 

I guess at the end of the day, by rule it is somewhat correct? Rule 69.7 states:

 

"Rebounds and Loose Pucks - In a rebound situation, or where a goalkeeper and attacking player(s) are simultaneously attempting to play a loose puck, whether inside or outside the crease, incidental contact with the goalkeeper will be permitted, and any goal that is scored as a result thereof will be allowed."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...