Quote:
|
Your team played well, but ultimately the fact that the Sharks went 7 I think is actually better for them in the long run.
|
Sharks sure did look gassed in the 3rd period. My prediction stands, Canucks in 6!
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by 8cd03gro
I just think it's obnoxious that after a bunch of ***** goaltender interference calls in the series on both teams, this blatantly obvious interference wasn't called or even reviewed and it was the series-winning goal in the series that will probably prove to be the deciding series of the playoffs this year.
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by NHL Rule Book 39.4 (viii)
The video review process shall be permitted to assist the referees in determining the legitimacy of all potential goals (e.g. to ensure they are “good hockey goals”). For example (but not limited to), pucks that enter the net by going through the net meshing, pucks that enter the net from underneath the net frame, pucks that enter the net undetected by the referee, etc
|
The first sentence is a giant catch all that could be applied to any goal under dispute, but the second sentence is clarification. Penalty calls are not reviewable by the current rule set, so even if the referees had wanted to review the play they couldn't have. It wasn't a debate as to whether or not the puck crossed the line, but whether or not the puck was dislodged because of an infraction. Penalties cannot be called from the replay booth, and the puck is clearly knocked in by Marleau cleanly.
<-- Hockey Referee. Everything is up to interpretation, and I'm sure Toronto took a good look at it, but they couldn't have done anything about it as penalties can only be called on the ice.
--
Jarrett