Paul Stewart: What We've Got Here is Failure to Communicate

The entire video review (in all sports, not just NHL) lacks logic. They try to follow rules, yet dismiss what actually happened during the play. To make the review totally correct, if a penalty is seen while reviewing the play, and no call was made during the live action, then the penalty should be called. Use the review to get the play correct, the entire play, or else in my mind, leave the human element be part of the game.

The entire video review (in all sports, not just NHL) lacks logic. They try to follow rules, yet dismiss what actually happened during the play. To make the review totally correct, if a penalty is seen while reviewing the play, and no call was made during the live action, then the penalty should be called. Use the review to get the play correct, the entire play, or else in my mind, leave the human element be part of the game.

Actually, the explanation by the ref at the time was that the puck had crossed the line before impact with the goaltender, so it was a good goal.
I'm not supporting the notion that this is how we should be crashing the net. In fact, quite the opposite. When Kreider slid into Carey Price a couple seasons ago, the city was in an uproar over it. I want Gallagher to go hard to the net, yes... But not hard into it. Not only is there potential to injure the goalie, but the player himself could get hurt. No good on either account.

Actually, the explanation by the ref at the time was that the puck had crossed the line before impact with the goaltender, so it was a good goal.
I'm not supporting the notion that this is how we should be crashing the net. In fact, quite the opposite. When Kreider slid into Carey Price a couple seasons ago, the city was in an uproar over it. I want Gallagher to go hard to the net, yes... But not hard into it. Not only is there potential to injure the goalie, but the player himself could get hurt. No good on either account.
- Darksyde

That is a lie. Watch the play. Freeze the frame at 1:07 and contact is made before the puck crosses the line. If I can see this with a youtube video, how can the NHL NOT be able to make the correct call.

Blashill didn't challenge. Why not? Apparently, the Detroit coach was unaware that he was allowed to issue a challenge on the basis of goaltender interference after the play had been reviewed in Toronto on a different basis.

Sounds more like an issue of the coach not knowing the rules and the tools at his disposal. That's on him.

Actually, the explanation by the ref at the time was that the puck had crossed the line before impact with the goaltender, so it was a good goal.
I'm not supporting the notion that this is how we should be crashing the net. In fact, quite the opposite. When Kreider slid into Carey Price a couple seasons ago, the city was in an uproar over it. I want Gallagher to go hard to the net, yes... But not hard into it. Not only is there potential to injure the goalie, but the player himself could get hurt. No good on either account.
- Darksyde

completely agree.

if that was the "ref's explanation then the ref got it wrong and the coach not challenging got it wrong.

I find the situation similar to a goal Malkin scored against the Leafs last season I believe.. where he actually pushed the Leaf goalie into the net with the puck.

I don't think there's intention to interfere with the goalie that justifies a penalty.. .but you sure shouldn't be able to score based on forcing the goaltender into the net.

That is a lie. Watch the play. Freeze the frame at 1:07 and contact is made before the puck crosses the line. If I can see this with a youtube video, how can the NHL NOT be able to make the correct call.
- powerenforcer

If you're responding to the bolded text, then you're wrong. After the review, that's exactly what the ref said. Ref made no call on the ice. That was the decision of the ref and the War Room. You can disagree all you like, but they likely have angles you aren't privy to, and/or they screwed up. Either way, saying they're "lying" makes you sound like some conspiracy nut, which I highly doubt.

If you're responding to the bolded text, then you're wrong. After the review, that's exactly what the ref said. Ref made no call on the ice. That was the decision of the ref and the War Room. You can disagree all you like, but they likely have angles you aren't privy to, and/or they screwed up. Either way, saying they're "lying" makes you sound like some conspiracy nut, which I highly doubt.
- Darksyde

The puck did not cross the goal line before the goalie was hit. That is what the video showed. To say anything else is a lie.

The entire video review (in all sports, not just NHL) lacks logic. They try to follow rules, yet dismiss what actually happened during the play. To make the review totally correct, if a penalty is seen while reviewing the play, and no call was made during the live action, then the penalty should be called. Use the review to get the play correct, the entire play, or else in my mind, leave the human element be part of the game.
- powerenforcer

I agree. The league looked at the replay and should have seen it was an illegal goal. But they ignored that because they were only commenting on whether it was kicked in.

It would be like police reviewing video to see if a guy robbed a corner store. In the video he kills the clerk but walks out without taking anything. So they say "let him go, he didn't rob the store." Extreme example but you get my point.

.

The puck did not cross the goal line before the goalie was hit. That is what the video showed. To say anything else is a lie.

A lie is voluntary. Don't think they voluntarily gave a goal to the Habs for no reason. They (probably) made an error on the play, but it's not the same thing as a lie.

A lie is voluntary. Don't think they voluntarily gave a goal to the Habs for no reason. They (probably) made an error on the play, but it's not the same thing as a lie.
- Popofjc

They lied about the outcome of the play. The puck was not across the goalline before Gallagher made contact with the goalie.