Prime Minister Koivu Posted April 29, 2006 Share Posted April 29, 2006 I'll take that no goal BUT it was a goal. Refs are ######ing both teams Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Funk Doc Posted April 29, 2006 Share Posted April 29, 2006 Brind'Amour practically pushed Huet out of the crease to get the goal. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sbhatt Posted April 29, 2006 Share Posted April 29, 2006 I'd say the right call was made....the Cane in the crease put his skate right between Huet's legs and pushed him aside to make the gap he put the puck through. Clear cut case of goaltender interference. Why VanMassenhoven could't see it, I don't know. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brobin Posted April 29, 2006 Share Posted April 29, 2006 Poor canes.. Refs in montreal... do they even get that they were handed a game by the refs? In any case, the reason it was not in the goal is because the cane was pushing Huet away with his leg... could have been interference... so really, they got a break Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mclusky Posted April 29, 2006 Share Posted April 29, 2006 Kevin Adams says your taught to battle for the puck, so I guess kicking the goalie out of the way to get room for your shot is what he meant. Brind'Amour looked like Chuck Norris on that play, legs flying everywhere. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gohabsgo252006 Posted April 29, 2006 Share Posted April 29, 2006 It was absolutely and clearly the right call. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter Puck Posted April 29, 2006 Share Posted April 29, 2006 We gave up way too many odd many rushes in the 2nd. We need to be more disciplined. I'm not very confident about the outcome of this game. Unlike the first 3 games of the series we have been clearly outplayed tonight. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Funk Doc Posted April 29, 2006 Share Posted April 29, 2006 Poor canes.. Refs in montreal... do they even get that they were handed a game by the refs? In any case, the reason it was not in the goal is because the cane was pushing Huet away with his leg... could have been interference... so really, they got a break I believe they got a break too. I say if they want to crowd Huet, montreal should keep on getting in front of Ward. Just enough to get in his way and piss him off, but not too much so we don't get called for goaltender interference. We gave up way too many odd many rushes in the 2nd. We need to be more disciplined. I'm not very confident about the outcome of this game. Unlike the first 3 games of the series we have been clearly outplayed tonight. I agree with you, but remember before in the 01-02 playoffs and the 03-04 playoffs we always got outplayed and out-shot and some how came out with the victory. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brobin Posted April 29, 2006 Share Posted April 29, 2006 Its right here: If an attacking player initiates contact with a goalkeeper, incidental or otherwise, while the goalkeeper is in his goal crease, and a goal is scored, the goal will be disallowed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter Puck Posted April 29, 2006 Share Posted April 29, 2006 Plekanek has really stepped up. He is playing his best hockey of the year. I think Gainey shoukld give him a couple of shifts with Higgins and Ryder. Before the game huzer predicted that would happen by the end of the night. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brobin Posted April 29, 2006 Share Posted April 29, 2006 # If an attacking player establishes a significant position within the goal crease, so as to obstruct the goalkeeper's vision and impair his ability to defend his goal, and a goal is scored, the goal will be disallowed. (NOTE) For this purpose, a player "establishes a significant position within the crease" when, in the Referee's judgment, his body, or a substantial portion thereof, is within the goal crease for more than an instantaneous period of time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fanpuck33 Posted April 29, 2006 Share Posted April 29, 2006 Brind'Amour practically pushed Huet out of the crease to get the goal. Yeah, but he was pushed into the crease by a Montreal player. It was a lousy call, but we deserve a few breaks in this series. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter Puck Posted April 29, 2006 Share Posted April 29, 2006 Its right here: If an attacking player initiates contact with a goalkeeper, incidental or otherwise, while the goalkeeper is in his goal crease, and a goal is scored, the goal will be disallowed. Yes this is the rule but the refs almost never call it. I can't remember that call being made even once this season. Was that the true reason they waved off the goal, or was it that one of the refs had already blown the whistle. Did anyone hear the official announcement? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brobin Posted April 29, 2006 Share Posted April 29, 2006 it is hard to see how that was not a penalty. Almost every scenario described that would disallow a goal, is also a penalty. I think the only way out is to say that Huet initiated the contact trying to get into position, which if it is in his crease, is not a penalty, but is also not a goal Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gohabsgo252006 Posted April 29, 2006 Share Posted April 29, 2006 Sorry there is a difference between establishing position and interfering he was clearly moving, htus not having an established position and therefore interfering with Huet. NO GOAL it was the right call Let's move on IF the contact is deemed incidental then it's unlikely that a penalty would be called Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brobin Posted April 29, 2006 Share Posted April 29, 2006 Where was the faceoff... if it was outside, then it was because the guy was in the crease. If it was a whistle, then it would be in the zone Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prime Minister Koivu Posted April 29, 2006 Share Posted April 29, 2006 I understand all of the habs fans (me too) seeing why that wasn't a goal but in my eyes, without bias, it was a goal. Again I will gladly take it. Carolina had their bullshit break last game, I guess this is ours. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gohabsgo252006 Posted April 29, 2006 Share Posted April 29, 2006 Here we go 3rd period GO HABS GO WOOOOO LEt's go boys Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brobin Posted April 29, 2006 Share Posted April 29, 2006 (edited) LOL, I think this is the one... # Subject to (i) below, if an attacking player enters the goal crease and, by his actions, impairs the goalkeeper's ability to defend his goal, and a goal is scored, the goal will be disallowed Wow.. another blown high sticking call in favour of the canes. Edited April 29, 2006 by brobin Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kenadian Posted April 29, 2006 Share Posted April 29, 2006 4 OFFICIALS MISSED THE HIGHSTICK ON MARKOV................COME ON! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fromage Posted April 29, 2006 Share Posted April 29, 2006 Williams should get suspended. Two high sticks, one on Koivu, and another just now on Markov. No penalties called. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prime Minister Koivu Posted April 29, 2006 Share Posted April 29, 2006 Where the ###### was the call on Markov and then on Rivet. ###### Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kenadian Posted April 29, 2006 Share Posted April 29, 2006 And Rivet get's highsticked by (Williams, you guessed it) after the whistle...and no call....... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Toren Posted April 29, 2006 Share Posted April 29, 2006 Calm down, the stick on Rivet was because he was pushed and crosschecked by two Montreal players. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kenadian Posted April 29, 2006 Share Posted April 29, 2006 Stillman was the one Souray pushed, Williams was behind all of them.............. We're still getting beat to lots of loose pucks, and watching the guy with the puck.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.