What's new
By:
USCHO Fan Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.

Your Chance To Play Video Replay Judge! Enter Your Verdict

Re: Your Chance To Play Video Replay Judge! Enter Your Verdict

Late to the party here, but that should have been a goal.

Too much time and gameplay elapsed between the player going through the crease (if he even did) and what should have been the game-winner going into the net. Here's what I mean by that statement: If the referees deemed that the skater's actions were egregious, the whistle should have been blown immediately after contact for a player in the crease violation, or a penalty should have been called, in which case the whistle should have also been blown immediately, as the skater's team was in possession of the puck.

Also: there is an official right there on the end line. If he doesn't see the contact made, what the hell is he looking at, and what is he doing on the ice in general?!?!?
 
Last edited:
Re: Your Chance To Play Video Replay Judge! Enter Your Verdict

The play should have been stopped after the contact with the goalie. Who initiated the contact is a judgement call and its tough to tell. You can see the goalie's leg bending, but that could be him trying to stop and set his position not intentionally trip the skater. Coming from someone who played wing and liked to do this kind of stuff all the time, its not that hard to make contact with the goaltender, move him out of position, but make it look like he initiated the contact, so it could very well have been the forward who initiated the contact - not saying it was, just that I can't tell. In either case the play should have been blown dead when the goalie went down regardless of who initiated the contact and there should have been a faceoff with roughly 49.9 seconds left, either in the zone or out of the zone, depending on who you judge initiated the contact. In either case it should not be a goal because the play should have been stopped about 5 seconds before the goal was scored.
 
Re: Your Chance To Play Video Replay Judge! Enter Your Verdict

Here's the problem. At the time of the contact the referees did not think that there was enough there to make a call either way. If they did, the whistle should have been blown on the spot. But there wasn't, so everything there is legal in the officiating crew's eyes and play continues. Puck goes in the net. Goal. Game over. Go shake hands.

You can't wait until a goal is scored 5 seconds after the initial contact and then think, well gee, maybe the guy was in the crease/made contact/we screwed up, even though you were standing right there and swallowed your whistle at the time. And you don't go calling something you didn't see. Now you've let 1 mistake become 2, and now you've got a whole lot bigger of a mess than you had in the first place.

There was an official right there on the end line less than 30 feet away from the contact. The puck was in the far corner of the zone, relative to the official. As I said before, if he didn't see that, that is ridiculous and the league has to take a look at whether he should be working games the rest of this season. If he did see it, he either (A) Makes a call immediately or (B) Play goes on. He either chose the latter, or he is not paying attention to what is going on right under his nose and is simply not doing his job.
 
Last edited:
Re: Your Chance To Play Video Replay Judge! Enter Your Verdict

I completely agree that they blew the call completely and if it wasn't a penalty before the goal it sohuldn't have been a penalty after the goal. My point is that they should have stopped the play before the goal ever happened. Changing the call after the goal was scored is ludicrous, but that doesn't change the fact that the goal should not count. There should never have been a goal to allow or disallow in the first place.
 
Re: Your Chance To Play Video Replay Judge! Enter Your Verdict

Certainly.

But what I am contending is that ship sailed once the decision was made not to blow the whistle upon the initial contact. According to the actions of the officiating crew, what happened in front of the net/crease was legal. Now, we can debate that until next Christmas. I would likely have blown the whistle right then and there and called goaltending interference. And if it's not goaltender interference, the goal is good on those grounds, too, as the team with the puck did not commit an infraction, and thusly there would be no reason to halt play. However, these officials did nothing. Therefore, based on their (in)actions at the time, the goal must then be a valid one, since they deemed everything that happened in this play beforehand was legal. Otherwise they would have blown the whistle by then.

I suspect that at this point we are discussing semantics as well as two different issues here.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top