@Bruins de Boston

Comment est-ce qu’il ne s’agit PAS d’une interférence avec le gardien de but ?



Comment se fait-il qu’il ne s’agisse pas d’une interférence avec le gardien de but ? Site Web : https://www.prolevelgamer.com/ Discord : https://discord.gg/VmsHpTCGHy Patreon : https://patreon.com/user?u=84783219 $2500 USD Prize Pool Ligue des 6 Ligue EASHL 6 : https : //discord.gg/fSBU8FTW59 Podcast TSP : https://www.youtube.com/c/TalkinSht #nhl #nhlhighlights #bostonbruins #nhlbruins #detroitredwings

44 Comments

  1. Refs need to have interviews at this point with all their Airtime.
    And they can explain their calls.

    Or the league can have a segment doing it.

  2. Does his entire body have to be outside the crease, or the point of contact, cause his right foot is still in the crease.

  3. I mean I’d be pissed if that call was against me but Swayman is outside of the blue paint when the shot comes. Maybe that was what the refs were looking at? I’m not too sure what the rules actually say about situations like that, but that’s my guess

  4. The fact of the matter is that it shouldn’t matter if he was outside the crease, a goal was scored because the stick on his glove limited Swayman’s ability to even save the puck

  5. If Kevin Hayes can drag carey price a full 5 feet out of the net and still have no goalie interference call made, anything can happen. This season has been a year of the worst calls ever. Refs need to get their shit together.

  6. So apparently this is NOT goaltender interference, but last night Jeannot was hooked into Shesterkin who left his position, and even though Igor was allowed to reset THAT didn't count. Not even the people managing the games know what goaltender interference is.

  7. Click bate video. No actual argument. Player was NOT in the paint when stick hits glove. Goalie also leaves the paint. The right call was made but the reason why it took as long as it did was because the officials and Toronto aren't always on the same page on the how the rules are interpreted.

  8. Maybe I’m missing your argument but Swayman appears to be outside of the crease and thus not goaltender interference.

  9. It was a really difficult call to make. Both teams had a strong argument. When it's a tough choice to make, they tend to let the play remain.

  10. doesnt matter if u think "it would make contact anyway" u gotta call one what did happen and even tho his stick was getting close Calo stick lifts up right into the glove so *imo they got it right

  11. As a Caps fan this is infuriating because we were straight robbed of both a win and a Ovi 2 goal game literally the other night by the refs because they gave a play infinitely softer than this a goalie interference

  12. He was out of the crease and the defensive player influenced the Wings player stick

  13. From a ranger fan that is a terrible call these idiots are so concerned with bodily contact they think the stick doesn’t matter horrible call

  14. Whats crazy is the explanation that swayman was outside of the blue paint, so goal allowed. These are NHL professional experienced refs. They should 100 percent know the rules. Then Toronto recants their call and says carlo initiated contact on rasmussen which led to the contact on Swayman…which also isnt the case. Its especially clear on the overhead and the video from behind the net. This is a league wide issue with consistency and its pathetic.

  15. I don't think it's goaltender interference because he's way out of his crease which means he's allowed to make contact to some extent

  16. incidental contact is permitted if the goalie is outside of the crease, right? i mean, that's what the rule book says.

  17. Worst was their explanation. They said because they contact occurred outside the crease it’s a good goal, which literally isn’t the rule.

    They must have spend so long to try and come up with a reason to allow it knowing there isn’t a good one.

  18. What does the player being in the crease for a minuscule amount of time have to do with whether this is interference, when any interference would have happened both the player and the goalie are entirely out of the crease. His stick was going for the tip and the goalie skated into it to cut off the angle.

  19. Goals should be disallowed only if: (1) an attacking player, either by his positioning or by contact, impairs the goalkeeper’s ability to move freely within his crease or defend his goal; or (2) an attacking player initiates intentional or deliberate contact with a goalkeeper, inside or outside of his goal crease. Incidental contact with a goalkeeper will be permitted, and resulting goals allowed, when such contact is initiated outside of the goal crease, provided the attacking player has made a reasonable effort to avoid such contact. The rule will be enforced exclusively in accordance with the on-ice judgment of the Referee(s) but may be subject to a Coach’s Challenge (see Rule 38).

  20. If you want to see a truly horrendous call, search for Lions vs Cowboys, the refs stole the win, the Lions 1st place seed, and a bye week in round 1 of the playoffs. That’s the worst call in any sport, with an impact far greater than a win or loss that I’ve seen in a long time.

  21. They definitely blew the call. They were saying cause it was outside the blue, but it started in the blue and led out. I couldn't believe the non-call at the time. The refs in this league need to learn consistency in their calls. It's ridiculous how inconsistent they are from one game to the next.

  22. Watch a Habs game and let me know how the refs are. Literally every game theres minimum 3 missed calls against them. They honestly dont care what other teams do. Like the Slav hit. Not a call or review on that hit but then 2 games later the same hit happens to the other team and yes it was only a minor but they instantly called it a major.

  23. Later in the game DeBrusk (Bruins) was hooked and tripped a few seconds apart and not a single arm went up from any official. Luckily he scored anyways, but both were blatant non-calls.

    If Marchand poked at a goalie like that it would 100% have been called interference.

    You can’t stop a game for almost five minutes looking at replays and STILL get that call wrong. It’s embarrassing to have this happen at the pro sports level. And to then give two completely different explanations for why (first they said you can contact a goalie outside the crease and it’s fine, then they changed the explanation once the geniuses in Toronto came up with a revised explanation).

  24. It's not goalie interference because the goalie's glove is outside the crease, and the attacking forward is also outside the crease so he is entitled to tip the puck if it had not been for the goalie's glove. Good call.

Write A Comment

Pin