Controverse entre les Coyotes de l’Arizona et l’Avalanche du Colorado alors que de multiples défis entraînent une longue révision des buts entre les deux équipes.
@Avalanche du Colorado
Controverse entre les Coyotes de l’Arizona et l’Avalanche du Colorado alors que de multiples défis entraînent une longue révision des buts entre les deux équipes.
41 Comments
This review started with 11:30 left on the clock, meaning 9 minutes and 30 seconds of the first period were played. This video is just over 9 minutes and 30 seconds. The game has been under review for the same amount of time as the game that's been played. I'm not complaining it took that long. This was a bizarre play all-around, and I thought it was interesting to put that into context
Unless the broadcast was wrong, that was one official-initiated review and one challenge, the teams did not "exchange challenges"
We need chips in pucks!
That is absolutely brutal by either the refs or whoever called it a goal originally in Toronto. None of these angles show the puck across the line. You can't assume anything. The refs said on the initial challenge by Arizona that they were checking to see if the puck crossed the line in a legal manner, to which they're saying they had a goal on the ice call. Refs might have had a better view point of that on ice, so sure. But then they came back after the first review just saying it had crossed the line – but they weren't reviewing for that! Then on Colorado's challenge, they challenge for goalie interference (puck entering the net in a legal manner) and it's overturned due to goalie interference which was supposed to be what they were reviewing for first… come on NHL just do your job right. Stop making this game so confusing even for people that have watched and played the game their whole life
My biggest complaint with this situation is goalie interference is changed on the fly. If you look at calls (or lack of them). This rule needs to be updated and the office in Toronto needs to be shut down. When they can’t even get their own rules down why even have them? Also they need better camera angles because this is getting out of hand. Imagine if this play was the game winning goal in a playoff game or even the championship game . I’m not a fan of either team but the office and officiating has been a sore spot in this sport for awhile now. Maybe I’m looking too much into it but this is a dumb . The whole thing is dumb .
Baffles me they called this a goal, there is absolutely zero evidence it crossed the line.
Wtf did I just see
I had to deal with going through this mess live, and it's 10 minutes of my life I will never get back. Not rewatching this horror show. Plays like this are why video review is generally hated by the sport watching population. Could have saved everyone a lot of time and headache by just sticking to the original call on the ice. This was absolutely ridiculous.
Would be nice if the NHL would come out after these with the angle(s) and some explanation.
the call on the ice was no goal. they review it and there’s no way you can 100% say it crossed the goal line there’s no 100% visual proof meaning by their own rules they can’t call that a goal. They have to be able to prove that it fully crossed in order to turn the call so idk why they said good goal in the first place
If they cant determine if its a goal in 60-90 seconds its too close to call and should be thrown out. Why delay the game on and on?
I honestly think this should be a goal and this is coming from an Aves fan because at 1:10 there is number 22 and he doesn’t push him over it’s an aves player that pushes him over and if you look at the right post the puck is in before any coyotes player touches the goaltender.
that was weird
thats a dang it
How do we have a NINE minute video of goal reviews when the past two Habs highlights have been less than THREE minutes
How long are you allowed to review a play???? It's like they are really looking for a coyotes goal…
Why all this drama for a puck that never clearly crossed the line?
This is hilarious. So you make a bad call saying it's a goal, so Bednar gives the refs a chance to redeem themselves. Ok now the refs look good.
Refs on ice: "No Goal"
Yotes: "I object"
Toronto: "Objection sustained"
Avs: "I strenuously object"
"Toronto: "Strenuous objection sustained"
the overhead view at 6:48 is probably the determination on the goal at the time, right before Kadri put his hand in the net you can see the puck on the toe of the pad which got pushed in by middleton's skate
it was a goal but by a goaltender interference so its not legit.
bizarre stuff lmao.
Little 10 min intermission halfway through the first
Another case of them getting it wrong how is it Larson fault if he’s just trying to poke the puck but that 4 avalanche player pile on top of the goalie like it’s 1990 and they just won a Stanley cup
Is this a dangit?
GPS tracking
Tummy.
Yet another instance where the coaches having to challenge a specific thing instead of the play makes the NHL look silly and convoluted. Ask Carolina fans last year.
THAT'S HOCKEY BABY!!!
That’s a dang it
i just cant see the puck on this video crossing the line, not saying it for sure didnt, but to overturn the call on the ice you need to clearly see the puck fully over the line. they probably have a higher resolution video than we see on youtube compression but what i see is just a dark space where we assume the puck to be, no line visible, and no clear edge of the puck visible. based on this video i would call this no goal. I would love for the NHL to release images of every single time they overturn one of these calls and an explanation as to why. because this is just so strange to see as a hockey fan. ive seen clearer images of pucks crossing the line than this that dont get called a goal.
Need to start giving us the view from Toronto. Sometimes the calls they make are so far out, it’s like they are watching a different game.
4:27 Great song for the occasion 😀
I found the puck, it was a goal
Refs had it right to begin with.
I would love to have the AAF rules where you can hear the refs talking during review
I mean i would say the 3 Aves had a bigger influence of Gru going into the net then Larsson
it wasnt a challenge on both ends. it was a review by the NHL and a challenge by avalanche.. no?
That will be on Steve's Dang it's
Both calls were wrong but it was the right result in the end. There was no view showing the puck cross the goal line. There was also no goalie interference.
No goal
Unbelievable. The refs actually made the wrong call twice on 1 play. Something has gotta change. This is getting absurd