Hockey Trash Talk & BS thread

^^^^^^WAH!!!

 

No such thing as a bad goal. It's a good goal or a no goal lol.

If you had any referee experience you would know what I put in bold is important. If Bernier had of kicked out his pad and the puck either; A) became visible moving away from the goal or B) came free from momentum of the stick under the pad, then this call would be crystal even to you. However since Bernier did not he put himself in the situation where the ref had to assume the puck was likely still in motion, and possibly in contact and forward motion with the players stick, which resulted in the call on the ice. That call was then reinforced by the video replay which didn't add any additional evidence.

Show me where you see the puck in those pictures lol. If the puck is still in motion under the pad it is a goal. From the refs and cameras vantage point it looks like it may of been, hence it's a good goal.

 

These are also the same refs who called a slashing penalty on Ryan Getzlaf against Thomas Hickey but in the replay Hickey already had a broken stick and Getzlaf was no where near Hickey. You know, those same people who get paid to make the right calls.

 

Except the people in Toronto also made this call. You know, the people who automatically review every goal in OT or the shootout that is even close to being challenged.

 

Will always be known as the Golden Vaginas to me. The helmet has that V shape in it.

 

If this was reviewed in Toronto this would be a different story. This call is made under review by the refs on the ice. These situations should be left up to Toronto to make the call.

 

This rule has nothing to do with this play. This rule would apply if the player shooting had of slide into Bernier and clearly moved the goalies body with his own body. Plus the "save" has not been made since in the video there is no way to tell if the puck has stopped its forward momentum. Actually if anything the video likely shows that the puck and stick were both moving towards the goal as well as Bernies pad.

 

It was reviewed there lol.

 

Funny I dont see in that rule where it says the player has to slide into the goaltender in order for that rule to be valid. I only see "when a goalkeeper has been pushed into the net".

 

It's up to the ref to make that decision, and in this case Toronto as well.

In all honesty how much leverage does a skating players stick have over a goalies pad? Have you ever played? Bernie could of kicked the puck out but he didn't, and he payed the price for not doing that.

If they called the rule the way you want it called then almost every goal with a player in any contact with the goalie would be disallowed. It's up to the referee, and Toronto if a goal is challenged like this one was automatically, to determine if the player pushed the goalie into the net or the puck. In this case there is no evidence to say that the puck was frozen, ie saved, under Bernie (which would mean the goalie has stopped moving as has the puck) rather than both were still in motion and that lead to the goal call.

 

https://twitter.com/mremis/status/801310214335164416?ref_src=twsrc^tfw

Look about 5 seconds into this clip (there is no timeline) you see Hickey place the puck and Bernier put his pad out. Hickey then makes another shoving motion right before his right skate gets to the goal line which causes Bernier to spin and his pad to cross the line. There was the initial stop then Hickey powered through pushing Bernier.

 

Best of all you know who scores goals? Players. Who stops the puck? Players. In this world of reviewable plays very few are called wrong. This is a case of not knowing exactly what the puck was doing once it was under Bernies pad and whether or not the puck was ever not in motion at the point it was under his pad. From the evidence the ref had in front of him, and with the support from Toronto, it appeared the puck was never saved and likely stayed in contact with the stick which resulted in the call that was made.

The only way to know for sure is to install some sort of tech in the puck that could trace the vector of the puck down to a very accurate level. It's been talked about but as of yet there is no good way to implement that.

 

Habs suck!!!!

Go Bruins!!!!

 

Sure, but Hickeys stick never leaves the goalies pad where the puck likely is. So, the puck is in motion and the stick is in contact with it which leads to a goal.

Think about it this way. If Bernier had of grabbed a players stick in the game and, somehow, that player managed to still score with that stick is that a no goal? Nope. It's a goal. Same situation here.

 

We can go back and forth all day, thats just how hockey fans are. My team is better than your team, your team is better than my team. Anything done against my team is good for you and vice versa.

 

Im going to strongly disagree with you because from what I have seen its horseshit call. You have your reasons I have mine. Lets just agree that the Kings suck balls and move on.

 

Except for I don't care about the Ducks but I do officiate a lot of hockey. These are the types of plays discussed in higher level clinics. Not necessarily on an NHL penalty shot lol, but on a break away. In those cases the ref doesn't have Toronto to make the right call. You have to make it yourself and sell it. Sometimes though players, coaches, and fans just want to win and throw out the rulebook for the injustice they perceive has been leveled upon them . Goalie interference and penalty shots are one of the few things where the rules are almost exactly the same between Hockey Canada and the NHL. Watching that gif I can't see anything that rules out a good goal.

For whatever it's worth Bernier did play for the Leafs last year. If this had of happened last year I'd still say the same thing. At the end of the day it's one point and if the Ducks wanted it they should of won it in regular time.

 

LOL I'll leave you two alone to debate which team out of the garbage conference is going to get a wildcard spot this year.

 

Id hope after almost 50 years.