The goalie interference is an interesting topic. I wasn’t able to watch the whole game but caught the 3rd period and the comeback. The tying goal was interesting. If I’m the ref I call it a goal because the defender was on top of the Anaheim player and he had no way to get out of the crease. That being said, I don’t know how the rule is written.
IIRC, they liberalized the rule after a critical goal was overturned because Brett Hull’s? skate was shown to be about an inch into the crease. Of course, everyone called BS on that. It was time for a rule change but what precisely is the rule now. Creating chaos in front of the crease make for a great scoring opportunity. How far do they let it go?
The rule is pretty unambiguous. It was goaltender interference. Any deliberate act by an offensive player to touch the goalie in the goal crease is a penalty, and disallows any goal.
We had a discussion on this, but the rule that was changed isn’t really relevant now; that rule had to do with it being illegal for a player to be in the crease when a goal was scored. That rule’s gone. The rules on goalie interference are pretty straightforward:
If an offensive player deliberately makes contact with the goalie, or deliberately hits a defensive player to make him make contact with the goalie, no matter where the goalie is, it is a penalty and no goal can be scored.
If an offensive player is in the crease and interferes with the goalie without touching him (e.g. he stands in the crease to block the goalie’s view) that is not a penalty, but any goal is disallowed.
If an offensive player is in the crease, and the goalie makes contact with him in an effort to defend the goal, and the offensive player does not immediately vacate his position, that is a penalty and the goal is disallowed.
Kesler’s initial contact with Talbot is not intentional, he is pushed into Talbot. But he remains in the crease, makes no effort to get out of Talbot’s way, and deliberately holds Talbot’s pad, which is intentional and is prohibited without exception. That’s interference, full stop.
And the interference call was missed in Game 4, too, on the third Anaheim goal; Kesler, even more egregiously, hits Talbot in the crease during the play.
I was seriously wavering over whether I was going to watch this. I’ve gotten sick of the NHL arrogantly presuming that they can just take over my Saturday afternoons.
Finally caved and turned on the TV, only to see Chris Neil on the ice. I love what he’s done for us in his career, but he has no business being anywhere close to the ice at this stage of his career. And so the TV went off before the puck was even dropped.
Small point of correction - it was a different jackass Ducks player, Corey Perry, who interfered with Talbot in G4. Tim & Sid had a breakdown on the day after this game of similar goals that had been called back during the regular season for interference and while there’s always minor differences, it’s tough to see this one as anything but interference. They had an interesting suggestion - if a replay is considered “inconclusive”, give the time out back so you’re not screwed on a challenge because there wasn’t sufficient video of it (I suppose that could get out of control, but there’s probably tweaks - two inconclusives and you lose it, maybe?)
The Game 5 goal, though - it’s insane. Yes, there was initial contact from Nurse. But how does that justify anything after that? Does he get free shots on Talbot because he got pushed in? Another suggestion I saw was that the refs literally didn’t see Kesler tugging on Talbot’s leg on their iPad - and indeed, the Canadian broadcast crew all missed that on their view until Elliotte Friedman pointed it out - they were prepared to agree with the call then became rather chagrined and flipped 180 on it. It was completely clear on my big screen at home from the beginning though.
Yep, it was a crazy, up-and-down, back and forth, edge-of-your-seat game. Considering Chris Neil barely saw 2 minutes of the beginning of 1st period, you turned it off way too soon.
Secondly, if you think the NHL is setting the playoff schedule, you’re sadly mistaken.
There are some cultural differences between Canadians and Americans and this is definitely one of them.
I really don’t understand your gripe. On weekend afternoons sports telecasts are the norm. Baseball, basketball, football, and yes, even hockey. Why should that be a problem? Put a bullet in you appetite for sports and find something more entertaining. Dancing with the Stars maybe? These Stanley Cup playoffs have been outstanding and if you are missing them that’s your loss.
Now to the current:
Go Predators! What an outstanding performance! It was worth it to lose in St. Louis and win it in front of the home fans. Nashville is becoming a hockey hot spot.
Anyone else remember when the idea behind the Weber-Subban trade was that Shae Weber was the kind of leader who’s get Montreal over the hump in the playoffs, like he… um… never did in Nashville?
I mean to be fair I wouldn’t blame Weber for the playoff exits in either Nashville or Montreal. But yes, that was a dumb trade by Montreal. As should surprise nobody, a great player like Subban can get you far in the playoffs on a good team. Montreal’s problem has always been that they’re not a very good team with an amazing goaltender to paper over their flaws.
It’s a cultural thing – tradition, if you will. It’s the whole cultural basis that gives the meme “Hockey Night in Canada” the timeless endurance it has, whether you’ve scheduled your evening around going to the game or setting up for a hockey evening at home. The fact that some other sports traditionally have day games really has little to do with it. Back when I was frequently attending hockey games there would occasionally be a regular season Saturday daytime game starting in the late afternoon, and the timing was just awkward and annoying. I think it was related to nothing more than arena scheduling, and ISTM that some of the afternoon games in this NHL postseason have been related to allowing viewers to see the maximum number of live games back to back, which is fair enough. But I still don’t like the daytime scheduling.
But I agree with you on this year’s playoffs. I’ve only seen some of the games, but most of them have been spectacular.
I appreciate your post. I am culturally attuned to weekend afternoon games. I certainly can’t fault NBC for broadcasting all of the playoff games. This playoff season has stolen too much of my time with amazing games. Even tonight, when the Oilers totally waxed the Ducks, I found myself watching to the end. They go back to Anaheim for what might prove to be a great game. The dynamics of the whole playoffs have been intriguing. I’d rather have the choice to watch all games than have the network only show the evening/night games.
I’m not blaming Weber, either, who is legitimately a great player. Sometimes great players just don’t get lucky in the playoffs. I just never got the “leadership” argument; what did Weber ever lead Nashville to? Why was Subban the leadership problem on Montreal, and not, say, Max Pacioretty, who is usually terrible in the playoffs? (Subban, a defenceman, averages more points per game in the playoffs than Pacioretty, a first line winger, does.)
Well, you all know the first explanation I’d like to provide.
As to the issue of playoff scheduling, I too admit I can’t find fault with the league and networks scheduling things in such a way as to try to make it possible for a fan to watch as many games as possible. I’m fine with that.
Hmm, the Pittsburgh-Washington series is now tied 3-3.
At least one sports columnist didn’t see it coming when the Penguins were on the verge of closing out the Capitals.
*"Watching the Pittsburgh Penguins-Washington Capitals series is like watching a big brother toy with a younger sibling. Whap, whap, whap, and the kid keeps coming back. Whap.
One of these years, the kid might just knock out big brother. It was supposed to be last year, but it wasn’t, or this year, but it isn’t. When will the kid learn?..
Soon, the Penguins will move on to their next opponent and Pens fans will have someone much fresher to hate."*
Yea, that why sports columnist are typically such putzes. The ones with literary ability have about disappeared. Worse than them are the idiotic talking heads on “fan radio”. I used to listen until I figured out they didn’t know any more than the dartboard. Yet, they pontificate. Just watch the game, form your own opinion and see if its right. It’s a more fun that way.
This Canucks fan is three years short of feeling as much pain. Funny how the first three years in the NHL, the Blues made the Stanley Cup finals, thanks to the requirement, at the time, that at least one of the teams in the finals has to be an expansion team:dubious: (not that they were expected to get past the strong '68, '69 Habs and '70 Bruins teams, and accordingly, the Blues were swept in all three finals)
I would never have guessed in a million years that the Oilers would’ve handed the Ducks such a beating in game six. The pressure on the Ducks in Anaheim tomorrow will be gigantic - for the past five years in a row, they’ve been eliminated in game sevens, each freakin time. Those kind of streaks are bound to be broken, so the Oilers better be on their toes tomorrow.
Just now seeing Hornqvist getting a skate in the face:eek: at the end of the first period of Wash./Pitt (good game so far) That was quite nasty seeing Sid going head-first into the boards and ice a bit earlier.
ETA - on further review - Holtby tripped up Sid as he went into the boards
Not a Preds fan (neither hater - just been always “curious” about them). Gotta send a nod their way for getting past the first two rounds. Seen maybe ten minutes of them so far in these playoffs. If Rinne is on, he’s as good as any goaltender, and so far in the playoffs he’s had a 1.37 GA and astounding .951 SV%. Go PK!
ok maybe I should’ve waited another two periods on that one…
don’t think I remember successive game six wins on blow-outs. huh.
When there was 2:30 left in the game, and Malkin scored to make it 5-2, I think Sullivan should’ve pulled* Fleury. Despite the odds of getting another three goals in 2:30 near ridiculous, the prospect of getting two or even one more goal is something I’m sure the fans would like to have seen, if only for that extra bit more time of adrenalin and fight (figuratively, that is) before sending them off to Washington.
*huh actually I gotta admit that I’m not sure if a goalie can be pulled after his team has just scored a goal or if he has to wait to go off the ice during the next course of play…Yes, I’m an incredibly un-ur-rulebook type a guy.
Honestly, how many sports columnists or journalists or whatever are worth a damn?
The Toronto Star’s baseball writer, Richard Griffin, knows less about baseball than most if not all of the people who have made posts to this thread, and is no better a writer, either. Some of the other local scribes are more competent than he, but none rise to the level of genuine insight, knowledge, or literary flair. Some seem to be very good at using contacts to find stuff out (Damien Cox jumps to mind) and I’ll grant that is not an easily found skill, but for the most part any one of these guys could be replaced tomorrow with a thousand people who’d do it for less. The guys on the radio are for the most part just a boy’s club of doofuses who play rec league hockey together and, again, know no more about the sports they are discussing than the fans do.
Sports is horribly underserved by talented writers, at least in these parts.
