I've looked at this video a few times

[dash]

and I can't find a reason to waive this goal off...

 

[dash]

Yes, the forward's skate makes contact with the Stars goalie skate, but it is well outside the crease. Doesn't the forward have the opportunity to establish position in front of the goal (i.e. they have equal rights to that spot on the ice)?

Here's what Rule 69 (insert joke here) says:

"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."

 

[Automattic]

Wait a couple hours.....Holmstrom will show you a "real" disallowed goal against the Stars...Friggin' rookies...

 

[esls79]

Not quite a McGeough special, but a blown call nonetheless.

Gotta get the Stars in the playoffs, bump up the value of the club for the impending sale you know...

 

[Bizzle McDizzle]

and I can't find a reason to waive this goal off...

REP for the screen capture showing E. Staal hat trick.

 

[Automattic]

REP for the screen capture showing E. Staal hat trick.

It's not like he went "Gordie" on the Ducks...

 

[Eddie_Shack]

The BJ's player was getting pushed a bit into the goalie by the Stars defense, the Stars goalie sold it, and it was outside the crease. Bull shit call.

 

[Slimpikins]

FUCK DALLAS!