Series Thread: Smash the Barks: Nashville (4) vs San Jose (3)

[TheRobotDevil]

I think it was originally ruled no goal because he knocked it forward with his hand. On replay, it was clear he knocked it in with his stick, just before it crossed the line, so it would have been good, except he was lying on Rinne when he did it. Thus, interference.

The initial "shot" on goal was played by his glove. The puck doesn't go in without contact.He had space and time to either attempt to avoid contact or get off Rinne. And Roenick said it was A goal definitely no goal.

 

[megalodon30]

Won on the over, lost on the Sharks. I don't know betting.

 

[Judge Fudge]

I Agree with the call. It was pretty cut and dry. Checked or not Palveski was on Rinne.

Rinne had NO CHANCE to stop the puck. Goalie Interference. I've seen this too many times

 

[Judge Fudge]

Fucking horseshit loss.

Of course Nashville wins. And with that I'm done with the NHL, again.

Gentleman. How could Rinne have stopped the puck

 

[TheRobotDevil]

I Agree with the call. It was pretty cut and dry. Checked or not Palveski was on Rinne.

Rinne had NO CHANCE to stop the puck. Goalie Interference. I've seen this too many times

The official NHL rules state


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. If deemed only to be incidental the play will be ruled as "no goal and no penalty."


Which is why the goal was waived off and no penalty was assessed. Had he not been pushed it would have been no goal and a 2 minute minor. In general another good rule to follow. Is when Jeremy Roenick speaks promptly insert two stanley cup rings in your ears. Im not sure how he has a job

heres the video link to the rule the correct call was made

Video Rulebook: Other Fouls | NHL.com - The National Hockey League - Video Rulebook


Fun game great win Preds

 

[Gooch1034]

The official NHL rules state


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. If deemed only to be incidental the play will be ruled as "no goal and no penalty."


Which is why the goal was waived off and no penalty was assessed. Had he not been pushed it would have been no goal and a 2 minute minor. In general another good rule to follow. Is when Jeremy Roenick speaks promptly insert two stanley cup rings in your ears. Im not sure how he has a job

heres the video link to the rule the correct call was made

Video Rulebook: Other Fouls | NHL.com - The National Hockey League - Video Rulebook


Fun game great win Preds

 

[TheRobotDevil]

View attachment 114969

I think its time NBC fires Roenick and gives his job to Roy. He's much more entertaining and intelligent

 

[Gooch1034]

I think its time NBC fires Roenick and gives his job to Roy. He's much more entertaining and intelligent

and knows how to piss people off by voicing his opinion unlike Roenick who is just a dumbass.

 

[TheRobotDevil]

and knows how to piss people off by voicing his opinion unlike Roenick who is just a dumbass.

True true it would be hysterical watching them work together for a week. Roenick would be yanking his hair out I seriously don't know how Roenick has A job. I was face palming while he was whining until i hit the mute button. He may want to pick up a rule book its not a grey area the rule is very clearly written

 

[Gooch1034]

True true it would be hysterical watching them work together for a week. Roenick would be yanking his hair out I seriously don't know how Roenick has A job. I was face palming while he was whining until i hit the mute button. He may want to pick up a rule book its not a grey area the rule is very clearly written

I think he tries to say ridiculous shit on purpose because its the only way he can get attention. Or maybe he really is that stupid?

 

[TheRobotDevil]

I think he tries to say ridiculous shit on purpose because its the only way he can get attention. Or maybe he really is that stupid?

I think part of it is attention seeking. And part of it is he likes to live vicariously through his former teams. He was a shark. didnt he cry when the Hawks won the cup?

 

[BGDave]

And Roenick said it was A goal definitely no goal.

'Nuff said. It's a goal.

 

[forty_three]

I turned it off after 1OT, but was soooo entertaining until I gave up. Happy it's evened up. Preds have been playing too well not to be rewarded.

Tough for the Refs, because both fanbases feel like they have a reason to gripe on reviewed calls, but to the letter of the law (rule book), the refs got both calls right. That Ward goal "tag up" thing was millimeters close, and what a head's up play to hold back before charging in.

As for the Pavs goal, if you watch Rinne had the puck in sights, and was moving towards it when Pavelski contacted him. Yes, Pavelski was checked, but the contact with Joe was about 8 feet away from Rinne. He wasn't driven into Pekka in the most literal sense. We can argue whether he had a true chance to avoid the goalie due to the check, but the bottom line is, to the rules, Rinne was in his crease and did not have the opportunity to make the save. Plus, Pavelski got his stick on the puck while on top of the goalie. Not sure it goes in otherwise. So the goal was scored *because* the goalie was taken out. To the rule, it has to be disallowed.

 

[forty_three]

YAY! WE WINS!

*thwoomp*

 

[forty_three]

Perhaps this explains why we haven't heard from UTVol yet today?

 

[Xulu Bak]

I dunno who decides the three stars of the game, but they should receive their pink slip shortly after Roenick. How the hell was Rinne not one?

 

[Sgt Brutus]

I dunno who decides the three stars of the game, but they should receive their pink slip shortly after Roenick. How the hell was Rinne not one?

I love Roenick!

 

[TheRobotDevil]

I love Roenick!

I'll give you an EZ pass on that one

 

[UTVolCountry]

Tuesday night

 

[UTVolCountry]

Last night/yesterday morning