Penguin goal over turned

[PSU Soupy]

what is the process that a goal can be overturned?

The first Pens "goal" was called a goal on the ice. The refs looked at their laptops and goal was counted.

Ottawa challenged and the review committee over turned the goal which all of the NBC Sports commentators thought should be a goal. So clearly there was not a conclusive view.

Just confused.

 

[Pocono Lion]

NHL office was confused as well. No way that goal should have been overturned. Although he's a prick, Milbury had a point when he said if the league has to look at it 5 or 6 times, it should not be overturned.

 

[mj1962]

what is the process that a goal can be overturned?

The first Pens "goal" was called a goal on the ice. The refs looked at their laptops and goal was counted.

Ottawa challenged and the review committee over turned the goal which all of the NBC Sports commentators thought should be a goal. So clearly there was not a conclusive view.

Just confused.

Don't be confused it is the nhl and it is the pens

 

[Thorndike2012]

Just a BS call. One of several tonight. Take away a perfectly fine Daly goal...give Ottowa a phantom interference 5 on 3. Really BADLY called game tonight.

It used to be that the refs would let the players play deep in the playoffs. Now they're deciding the games. Clearly someone with power wanted a game seven and they got it. Pure cheating tonight.

 

[ILLINOISLION]

The officiating has been awful in this series as well as the just ended Nashville - Anaheim series.

Wish the officials would enforce the whistle and stop all the crap and wrestling that goes on after the whistle. It just cheapens the game.

 

[McNit2]

what is the process that a goal can be overturned?

The first Pens "goal" was called a goal on the ice. The refs looked at their laptops and goal was counted.

Ottawa challenged and the review committee over turned the goal which all of the NBC Sports commentators thought should be a goal. So clearly there was not a conclusive view.

Just confused.

Pens were hosed. Now to Game #7 - always dangerous. Bad goalie play or good goalie play can be a difference maker. Always think back to the Pens squad going for 3-Peat. Had their best team ever but let it go to Game 7 and then uh-oh...!

 

[PennState_one]

Just a BS call. One of several tonight. Take away a perfectly fine Daly goal...give Ottowa a phantom interference 5 on 3. Really BADLY called game tonight.

It used to be that the refs would let the players play deep in the playoffs. Now they're deciding the games. Clearly someone with power wanted a game seven and they got it. Pure cheating tonight.

Yep, obviously more money to be made having one more game in the series

 

[VaNtyLion]

I'm a life long hockey fan but the NHL is becoming pretty unwatchable. Not sour grapes about the game or the disallowed goal as I can somewhat understand the official thinking Daley pushed goalie's pads into the net, which should negate the play. It's not really something I'd say the game was decided on, coming with over 35 minutes to play.

However, everything about the officiating in pretty much every playoff game I've seen continues to prove the league is run by incompetence on the ice and dinosaurs in the front office with no consideration for what it takes to promote the game in 2017.

Love the run the Pens have been on and can't be disappointed in what happens regardless of the game 7 outcome (they've probably overachieved given the decimated lineup).....but if Ottawa advances I'll take solace in knowing the league is going to get exactly what it deserves in what may become the least watched Stanley Cup final ever.

 

[lionlurker]

I'm as big a hockey fan as there is, but I've gotten rid of my Center Ice package, and I don't want to watch any games that don't involve the Penguins. The games are just unwatchable. Most of the time I can't even sit through a Penguins game for the whole thing anymore. But I guess as long as Joe in Saskatoon is happy with the state of the NHL, that is all that matters.

 

[canuckhal]

Before putting the puck in the net, Daly pushed Andersen into the net. That is why he was not a position to make a play because he was in the back of the net. Hence goalie interference.

 

[LionDeNittany]

what is the process that a goal can be overturned?

The first Pens "goal" was called a goal on the ice. The refs looked at their laptops and goal was counted.

Ottawa challenged and the review committee over turned the goal which all of the NBC Sports commentators thought should be a goal. So clearly there was not a conclusive view.

Just confused.

I'm indifferent on this series but the fact that the goalie slid 2 feet after being pushed by the offensive player means goaltender interference.

The players stick/hand was pushing the goalie's foot/skate towards the end of the play and takes the goaltender out of the play.

It was a good call IMO.

LdN

 

[Nittany18]

Don't be confused it is the nhl and it is the pens

Spot on. Pens get abused by the NHL.

 

[Woodpecker]

Before putting the puck in the net, Daly pushed Andersen into the net. That is why he was not a position to make a play because he was in the back of the net. Hence goalie interference.

Maybe I'm looking at it through Pens colored glasses but it looked like the goalie flopped back into goal on his own. It looked to me like any contact that Daley made with him was mitigated by defender contact. However I'm willing to defer to a canuck having superior hockey knowledge than I. Can the refs look at other things going on on that same play? Wasn't there some nasty holding/interference going on away from the net?

While we're at it, can you explain interference to me? Sometimes when it gets called, I don't see anything that I don't see hundreds of times throughout the game and other times, I can't understand how interference is NOT called. Type slow because I'm obviously not the brightest bulb in hockey matters (OK, most other matters too).

 

[PSU Soupy]

Maybe I'm looking at it through Pens colored glasses but it looked like the goalie flopped back into goal on his own. It looked to me like any contact that Daley made with him was mitigated by defender contact. However I'm willing to defer to a canuck having superior hockey knowledge than I. Can the refs look at other things going on on that same play? Wasn't there some nasty holding/interference going on away from the net?

While we're at it, can you explain interference to me? Sometimes when it gets called, I don't see anything that I don't see hundreds of times throughout the game and other times, I can't understand how interference is NOT called. Type slow because I'm obviously not the brightest bulb in hockey matters (OK, most other matters too).

I agree with you....well maybe not on you "not being the brightest bulb in hockey matters", but with regard to the inconsistencies in the calls, if the refs would make the level of a penalty the Hainsey interference and call that play equally against the Pens and the Sens, the Penguins would have won in 5. The clutching, the grabbing, the cross checking and the headshots occurring without any possibility of a penalty being called is takes away the flow of a hockey game. The Pens have been guilty of the cross checking as well due to the laxness of the calls.

The reason why Malkin has been one of the only players to make one on one plays is due to his strength to shrug off the multiple Sens grabbing his stick, his shirt......and still he can get to the net.

 

[lionlurker]

The point is, there's no reason to have any skill, because the refs will allow every hack and whack player to do whatever they can to negate it, no matter how illegal it is.

 

[AvgUser]

I'm indifferent on this series but the fact that the goalie slid 2 feet after being pushed by the offensive player means goaltender interference.

The players stick/hand was pushing the goalie's foot/skate towards the end of the play and takes the goaltender out of the play.

It was a good call IMO.

LdN

I did not see the play. However, if the OP is correct in stating what happened, it was ruled a goal on the ice. It was reviewed and confirmed to be a goal. Then it was protested and taken away. WTF? What possibly could have changed in the re-review.

This also happened with the Pens-Caps series (i think). Ruled a goal. Reviewed and confirmed to be a goal. Protested and taken away.

Why doesn;t the NHL do best two out of three on reviews?

 

[bjf1991]

I did not see the play. However, if the OP is correct in stating what happened, it was ruled a goal on the ice. It was reviewed and confirmed to be a goal. Then it was protested and taken away. WTF? What possibly could have changed in the re-review.

This also happened with the Pens-Caps series (i think). Ruled a goal. Reviewed and confirmed to be a goal. Protested and taken away.

Why doesn;t the NHL do best two out of three on reviews?

The call was horrible:
BAD

The way the call was done (which you accurately outlined) was even worse:
BAD - SQUARED

The fact that these "goalie interference" calls have had huge impacts in seemingly every series - - - with absolutely zero consistency in their enforcement (or even common sense) is worse still:
BAD - CUBED


The fact that the entire issue has been a cluster-f**k for years, and could be solved in about 15 minutes (if the League had one HMFIC with a functional frontal lobe). Something as simple as - "you cant hit/contact the Goalie while he is in the paint", or any number of other clear and enforceable regulation(s) you might prescribe (and then enforce the rule)..... if you truly wanted to eliminate the issue:
BAD - TO THE FOURTH


It is such a shame that the league is run by, and officiated by, such dickheads.
There is nothing else in sports (IMO) as captivating as a Game 7 in the Stanley Cup.......
There is no task in sports (IMO) as difficult as running the gauntlet through the four rounds of the playoffs to hoist the Cup.....
But these buffoons sure do make it hard to care sometimes.



That said - one comment on the series thus far:

It has been AMAZING to watch this depleted Penguins squad simply tear through the "vaunted" Ottawa defensive trap.
Obviously, not enough "biscuits in the basket"....but their relentless efforts in the zone and along the boards has been masterful - and a joy to watch.

On a scale of 1-100, their effort (what term does Sullivan like to use? "Compete Level"...or something like that) has been 101.

 

[PSU2UNC]

I did not see the play. However, if the OP is correct in stating what happened, it was ruled a goal on the ice. It was reviewed and confirmed to be a goal. Then it was protested and taken away. WTF? What possibly could have changed in the re-review.

This also happened with the Pens-Caps series (i think). Ruled a goal. Reviewed and confirmed to be a goal. Protested and taken away.

Why doesn;t the NHL do best two out of three on reviews?

Here's some clarification on the review/challenge process.

1) The review was to see if the puck was in the net. This occurs on any questionable (i.e. did the puck cross the goal line) goals. It was found to have been in the net.

2) The challenge was for goalie interference. And yes the exact same thing happened in the Pens/Caps series.

I won't get into whether this was a bad call or not (it was). The problem is that they have made a non-binary judgement call (goalie interference) a reviewable play under challenge.

Using a challenge to see if a play was offside is fine: either the play was offside or it wasn't. Using it for a judgement call is a terrible idea.

The football analogy here is Barkley scores by diving into the endzone from three yards out. The replay officials review the TD (a they do all scoring plays) to determine if he broke the plane and review confirms a TD. Then Harbaugh the Whiner challenges that the PSU OT was holding on the play, so they look at the play again and determine, "oh yeah, I guess we could call holding there. No TD."

It's a terrible rule.

And the implementation of that rule (Puck in crease. Player plays pucks. Only contact with goalie occurs in act of playing puck in crease) in this particular case was laughable.

 

[PSU2UNC]

Something as simple as - "you cant hit/contact the Goalie while he is in the paint", or any number of other clear and enforceable regulation(s) you might prescribe (and then enforce the rule)..... if you truly wanted to eliminate the issue:

.

I think the fix for this is similar to what you suggest but I would phrase it as:

"If the puck is in the crease, contact with the goalie in the act of playing the puck will be deemed incidental (not interference)."

This prevents guys from steamrolling the goalie when the puck is in the paint (which is really the purpose of the rule), but does allow for loose pucks to played without worry that you might touch the goalie.

The way it is written now "preventing the goalie from making a play on the puck" is terrible, because any contact resulting in a goal could be viewed that way.

 

[BUFFALO LION]

what is the process that a goal can be overturned?

The first Pens "goal" was called a goal on the ice. The refs looked at their laptops and goal was counted.

Ottawa challenged and the review committee over turned the goal which all of the NBC Sports commentators thought should be a goal. So clearly there was not a conclusive view.

Just confused.

Even if you give Ottawa the benefit of the doubt on the overturned goal, that Interference penalty was pure Bush League. That 5 on 3 should have never happened.

And the cheap shot on Crosby's head right in his first shift of the game should have been delt with by someone like a Dave Schultz or a Bob Probert. You never had this many cheap shots on stars or illegal stick work going on when guys like them handled the "penalties" and "fines".

 

[Sandinista!]

Even if you give Ottawa the benefit of the doubt on the overturned goal, that Interference penalty was pure Bush League. That 5 on 3 should have never happened.

And the cheap shot on Crosby's head right in his first shift of the game should have been delt with by someone like a Dave Schultz or a Bob Probert. You never had this many cheap shots on stars or illegal stick work going on when guys like them handled the "penalties" and "fines".

There was also a play out front where the Ottawa defender basically rode Sid around the ice and no call. Another where their player sat on sid when he was down and wouldn't let him up. But yeah, that play was an interference?!

 

[bjf1991]

Here's some clarification on the review/challenge process.

1) The review was to see if the puck was in the net. This occurs on any questionable (i.e. did the puck cross the goal line) goals. It was found to have been in the net.

2) The challenge was for goalie interference. And yes the exact same thing happened in the Pens/Caps series.

I won't get into whether this was a bad call or not (it was). The problem is that they have made a non-binary judgement call (goalie interference) a reviewable play under challenge.

Using a challenge to see if a play was offside is fine: either the play was offside or it wasn't. Using it for a judgement call is a terrible idea.

The football analogy here is Barkley scores by diving into the endzone from three yards out. The replay officials review the TD (a they do all scoring plays) to determine if he broke the plane and review confirms a TD. Then Harbaugh the Whiner challenges that the PSU OT was holding on the play, so they look at the play again and determine, "oh yeah, I guess we could call holding there. No TD."

It's a terrible rule.

And the implementation of that rule (Puck in crease. Player plays pucks. Only contact with goalie occurs in act of playing puck in crease) in this particular case was laughable.

Yep


And the whole thing - which has been a cluster for years - could be a non-issue in 15 minutes if you had one "non-idiot" write an actual clear enforceable standard.

 

[LionDeNittany]

I did not see the play. However, if the OP is correct in stating what happened, it was ruled a goal on the ice. It was reviewed and confirmed to be a goal. Then it was protested and taken away. WTF? What possibly could have changed in the re-review.

This also happened with the Pens-Caps series (i think). Ruled a goal. Reviewed and confirmed to be a goal. Protested and taken away.

Why doesn;t the NHL do best two out of three on reviews?

Well the initial review was about whether or not the puck went into the net. That wasn't completely obvious initially.

THEN they reviewed the goaltender interference.

LdN

 

[PSU Soupy]

Totally agree, there is enough randomness in the game without adding to the randomness with inconsistent refereeing.

 

[joeparules]

Totally agree, there is enough randomness in the game without adding to the randomness with inconsistent refereeing.

Every sport has randomness in the game ... football (pass interference, holding), baseball (balls/strikes), basketball (most "fouls"), hockey (goalie interference, roughing), soccer (off-sides). Instant replay has removed some randomness (TD/no TD, fair/foul, in-bounds/out-of-bounds, out/safe, before/after 0:00, goal/no goal). But if every sport was like track (little to no randomness), what would people have to complain about the next morning at the water cooler?! Isn't this what makes these other sports more "fun" to watch ... the human component?

Bottom line is if you're a Sen's fan it was the right call and if you're a Pen's fan it was a bad call.

 

[Cletus11]

I'm as big a hockey fan as there is, but I've gotten rid of my Center Ice package, and I don't want to watch any games that don't involve the Penguins. The games are just unwatchable. Most of the time I can't even sit through a Penguins game for the whole thing anymore. But I guess as long as Joe in Saskatoon is happy with the state of the NHL, that is all that matters.

The current game is worse compared to what? The skating and level of play in today's game is light years beyond what it was in the 70's and 80's. The 90's and early 2000's were ruled by clutch and grab to the point the NHL cancelled an entire season and completely reworked the game. Now the game is about speed and creativity with guys that can skate and pass at a premium regardless of size. The Pens typify that game to the utmost. Guenzel, Sheery, Kessel, Hagelin are guys that would be too small to excel in hockey until the rules were changed. The game of hockey and level of play today are better than it ever has been. The refererees have good and bad games. Have you watched the NBA recently, not like they have great refs, BBall refs influence games way more than hockey refs do. I don't remember the last time i heard good things about football refs. So refs are openly hated in just about all sports, not a reason to stop watching unless you just don't like the game anymore.

 

[psu7113]

Before putting the puck in the net, Daly pushed Andersen into the net. That is why he was not a position to make a play because he was in the back of the net. Hence goalie interference.

I think Daly did push the goalie, but only because Karlsson was pushing Daly from behind. Is THAT goalie interference? Not sure.

 

[dbsteel]

Its a garbage league- they call stuff one day, they don't the next. Crosby gets molested all game- nothing. Then they call some stupid interference at bad time. Worst officiating in sports. It needs consistency.

 

[redbyrds]

Mario said it 20 years ago & can say it again today.

NHL has become a garage league.