Jump to content
The Official Site of the Vancouver Canucks
Canucks Community

[GDT] Around the NHL | January/February (30-03) 2018


Recommended Posts

10 minutes ago, -Vintage Canuck- said:

Check out Connor McDavid showing off ridiculous hand-eye coordination on the fly to score against the Avalanche.

 

 

His 10 minutes of effort each night counterbalanced by 50 minutes of sulking is why the dominating Oilers are Cup favourites.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lots of goalie interference calls making no sense tonight, actually getting pretty sad.

 

STL vs BOS good goal...

The explanation as to why the goal counted was that Allen didn't fight his way back into position, and therefore could not have made the save, according to The Athletic's Jeremy Rutherford.

 

Vegas vs Jets good goal...

"I think it’s a terrible call (Hellebuyck). You would think the video replay is there for that reason (to overturn calls like that). That’s just dirty. I can take a stick to the face. But just because I don’t throw my head back and make it obvious, I feel like I got kind of screwed".

 

 

Col vs Edm No goal.

This one is a little different yes the right call was made, but the wrong call could of been made if it wasn't for having a coach's challenge still....

 

Colorado head coach Jared Bednar watched the most obvious case of goaltender interference announced as a goal. The on-ice officials were just checking to see that the puck had crossed the goal line. It had, securely under Jonathan Bernier’s catching glove, which was clearly pushed over the line by Oiler Drake Caggiula’s stick. Bednar then had to use his challenge, and the Situation Room in Toronto made the obvious call: no goal.

 

Had Bednar already used his challenge, that goal would have counted. 

 

 

I know this issue was addressed at the All Star Game by Buttman, and basically referees are going on first instinct now, probably because they were told to allow more goals for more revenue, but clearly it's not working and something more needs to be addressed. Since when did refs stop being refs and letting players run the crease and take goalies out? Swing a stick so hard and it breaks over a goalies mask why no penalty? Something just doesn't add up, is it lack of experience for refs in their job? Or are they just being pressured to allow more goals? To confused? Maybe some, but lots of controversy are just having the right hockey sense to make the right call, which seems the Refs now a days are lacking in the first place. 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, ChuckNORRIS4Cup said:

Lots of goalie interference calls making no sense tonight, actually getting pretty sad.

 

STL vs BOS good goal...

The explanation as to why the goal counted was that Allen didn't fight his way back into position, and therefore could not have made the save, according to The Athletic's Jeremy Rutherford.

Vegas vs Jets good goal...

"I think it’s a terrible call (Hellebuyck). You would think the video replay is there for that reason (to overturn calls like that). That’s just dirty. I can take a stick to the face. But just because I don’t throw my head back and make it obvious, I feel like I got kind of screwed".

 

 

Col vs Edm No goal.

This one is a little different yes the right call was made, but the wrong call could of been made if it wasn't for having a coach's challenge still....

 

Colorado head coach Jared Bednar watched the most obvious case of goaltender interference announced as a goal. The on-ice officials were just checking to see that the puck had crossed the goal line. It had, securely under Jonathan Bernier’s catching glove, which was clearly pushed over the line by Oiler Drake Caggiula’s stick. Bednar then had to use his challenge, and the Situation Room in Toronto made the obvious call: no goal.

 

Had Bednar already used his challenge, that goal would have counted. 

 

 

I know this issue was addressed at the All Star Game by Buttman, and basically referees are going on first instinct now, probably because they were told to allow more goals for more revenue, but clearly it's not working and something more needs to be addressed. Since when did refs stop being refs and letting players run the crease and take goalies out? Swing a stick so hard and it breaks over a goalies mask why no penalty? Something just doesn't add up, is it lack of experience for refs in their job? Or are they just being pressured to allow more goals? To confused? Maybe some, but lots of controversy are just having the right hockey sense to make the right call, which seems the Refs now a days are lacking in the first place. 

 

 

For the two videos you posted, I agree with the results of the review, and in both cases, I was rooting for the team being scored against.

 

Allen made no effort to get back to the crease, and he took himself out of the crease.  At first I thought it would be disallowed, but when I saw the replay, I thought the call was fine.  Arguably borderline since there was some contact with Bruins, and if it was overturned, I'm not sure how surprised I would have been.

 

The Vegas goal... nothing at all wrong with the review, assuming that the review cannot be used to call a penalty.  A high stick probably should have been called (I say probably because I assume Neal doesn't get to use the follow-through rule since he didn't connect on his shot), but the review cannot be used to call a missed penalty other than interference, IIRC.  The puck is loose before Neal hits Hellebuyck, and there's nothing to suggest that Hellebuyck knew it was loose until after it was in the net.  Ref missed the penalty call, but the video review was unfortunately correct.

 

With the Oiler "goal", that's why we have the review.  From the angles we see, it is obviously not a goal, but we can't tell where the official is when it happens.  You see him far back in the corner when the play develops, and if he stayed here, more or less, I can understand him not being able to see the stick push it in.  Without other angles to see where he was, it's hard to criticize the ref too much here, except perhaps for his positioning.

 

I agree with the sentiment that there is too much inconsistency with the interference reviews.  I just don't see it here,

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, Kragar said:

For the two videos you posted, I agree with the results of the review, and in both cases, I was rooting for the team being scored against.

 

Allen made no effort to get back to the crease, and he took himself out of the crease.  At first I thought it would be disallowed, but when I saw the replay, I thought the call was fine.  Arguably borderline since there was some contact with Bruins, and if it was overturned, I'm not sure how surprised I would have been.

 

The Vegas goal... nothing at all wrong with the review, assuming that the review cannot be used to call a penalty.  A high stick probably should have been called (I say probably because I assume Neal doesn't get to use the follow-through rule since he didn't connect on his shot), but the review cannot be used to call a missed penalty other than interference, IIRC.  The puck is loose before Neal hits Hellebuyck, and there's nothing to suggest that Hellebuyck knew it was loose until after it was in the net.  Ref missed the penalty call, but the video review was unfortunately correct.

 

With the Oiler "goal", that's why we have the review.  From the angles we see, it is obviously not a goal, but we can't tell where the official is when it happens.  You see him far back in the corner when the play develops, and if he stayed here, more or less, I can understand him not being able to see the stick push it in.  Without other angles to see where he was, it's hard to criticize the ref too much here, except perhaps for his positioning.

 

I agree with the sentiment that there is too much inconsistency with the interference reviews.  I just don't see it here,

Regarding the teams first, I could care less who wins or loses but I'll admit I'm not a Boston fan at all, but I'm not being bias because they were involved I'm going on what I believe is right and wrong. 

 

I am a little surprised by your decisions on the goals but you're entitled to your opinion, but blaming Allen for taking himself out of the crease WHAT? Some contact WHAT? Allen had 2 Boston players push him out of the crease not 1, 2 players that's more than some contact lol, and 2 seconds later the puck is in the net, 2 seconds to try and get back in the net with 2 players still blocking you... Strongly disagree should of been goalie interference goal shouldn't of counted. 

 

The Vegas one as you mentioned is a little of a gray area, because yes video review can't issue a penalty but was it goalie interference... Goalie interference is only considered interference if a player physical touches the goalie with his body then, if his stick is used with enough force to hit a goalie that isn't considered goalie interference because his actual body didn't touch him to interfere... I'm sorry but if I was a goalie and player hit me with that much force to break his stick and I didn't fall back to sell it and they scored because of it, I would be livid there's no way that should be allowed. Almost at concussion protocol at that point taking that much force to the head, should be more concerned about the goalie then the goal.

 

Yeah but with the Oiler one if he didn't have a coach's review still that goal would of counted and that's not right, that's the point just lucky the Challenge was still available. What if that was for a playoff spot and the goal counted because he had no more Coaches Challenge is that right? Isn't the point of video review to make the right call, for the integrity of the game? One comparison with another sport I think of is Baseball, if a player hit a homerun or thought he did but a fan reached over the wall and cought it but it was ruled a homerun should it be allowed because he doesn't have anymore challenge? No because they will review it to make the right call no matter what, why should it be any different in the NHL coach's shouldn't be limited to a challenge on a goal, should be about making the right call no matter what.

 

We definitely agree on one thing the inconsistency lol, but regarding these goals and the way goals are being judged/review I don't think we do.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, ChuckNORRIS4Cup said:

Regarding the teams first, I could care less who wins or loses but I'll admit I'm not a Boston fan at all, but I'm not being bias because they were involved I'm going on what I believe is right and wrong. 

 

I am a little surprised by your decisions on the goals but you're entitled to your opinion, but blaming Allen for taking himself out of the crease WHAT? Some contact WHAT? Allen had 2 Boston players push him out of the crease not 1, 2 players that's more than some contact lol, and 2 seconds later the puck is in the net, 2 seconds to try and get back in the net with 2 players still blocking you... Strongly disagree should of been goalie interference goal shouldn't of counted. 

 

The Vegas one as you mentioned is a little of a gray area, because yes video review can't issue a penalty but was it goalie interference... Goalie interference is only considered interference if a player physical touches the goalie with his body then, if his stick is used with enough force to hit a goalie that isn't considered goalie interference because his actual body didn't touch him to interfere... I'm sorry but if I was a goalie and player hit me with that much force to break his stick and I didn't fall back to sell it and they scored because of it, I would be livid there's no way that should be allowed. Almost at concussion protocol at that point taking that much force to the head, should be more concerned about the goalie then the goal.

 

Yeah but with the Oiler one if he didn't have a coach's review still that goal would of counted and that's not right, that's the point just lucky the Challenge was still available. What if that was for a playoff spot and the goal counted because he had no more Coaches Challenge is that right? Isn't the point of video review to make the right call, for the integrity of the game? One comparison with another sport I think of is Baseball, if a player hit a homerun or thought he did but a fan reached over the wall and cought it but it was ruled a homerun should it be allowed because he doesn't have anymore challenge? No because they will review it to make the right call no matter what, why should it be any different in the NHL coach's shouldn't be limited to a challenge on a goal, should be about making the right call no matter what.

 

We definitely agree on one thing the inconsistency lol, but regarding these goals and the way goals are being judged/review I don't think we do.

I only mentioned the rooting to help show that there was no bias involved in my analysis.  I never even considered your view to be biased.

 

Allen was clearly sliding to the other side of the crease before he is contacted by the Bruins.  I agree that the Bruins added to the slide, but Allen never made an effort to get back to the crease, until the goal was being scored.  He had no clue the puck squirted though him, and likely thought it was in his equipment, which is a good reason not to move too much.  If he had been making the effort to get back, then I would agree there was interference.

 

At first, I didn't think it would matter if Hellebuyck "sold it" or not, but I'm less sure now.  Still, with the puck making it through him before the stick contacted him, and not having any sign that he knew the puck squirted through, I'd still lean against interference being an option there.  It's just unfortunate the slash/high stick wasn't called.

 

I don't watch baseball anymore, so I don't know their video rules and if there are limits like.  In NHL and NFL, there are limits to the number of reviews.  If they are used up and the refs miss a play, that's the way it goes.  If you are arguing for more reviews, that's a different discussion.

 

With NHL reviews, I don't know when the head office comes into play.  They used to review many goals.  Do they do that anymore?  They should, for just this case where it appears the ref doesn't have the chance to make the right call.  Cuz that Oiler play was about as blatant as it gets for pushing the goalie in the net.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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