Photographic proof: Officials seriously botched Gagne goal call vs Penguins
by Travis Hughes on Mar 28, 2010 4:27 PM EDT
in Commentary
Email
PrintWe're of the opinion that the officials completely screwed the Flyers over on Saturday against the Penguins. The most ridiculous of the errors made came in the second period when a Simon Gagne goal was called back because Ville Leino made incidental contact with Pens goalie Marc-Andre Fleury outside of the crease.
Never mind the fact that, you know, the rules say a goal can't be waived off because of incidental contact outside the crease. As a refresher, Rule 69.1, please.
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. The rule will be enforced exclusively in accordance with the on-ice judgment of the Referee(s), and not by means of video replay or review.
Referee Dan Marouelli said over the public address that "the goal has been disallowed due to incidental contact with the goaltender" even though that's clearly contrary to the rule outlined above. The only other way for this goal to be disallowed is if Leino didn't try to stop after realizing he was going to hit Fleury.
Until about 3:46 this afternoon, it was mostly just us (and Gagne himself) trying to point out this unbelievable error. That's when Brandon Worley of ProHockeyTalk jumped on the case. He took a few screen shots of the video from the play, proving that the collision did indeed take place outside the crease, but more importantly, clearly proving that Leino made every attempt to stop before colliding with Fleury.
As you can tell, Leino is slamming on the brakes as he's about to hit Fleury. If that's not a "reasonable effort to avoid such contact," I'm not too sure what would suffice.
I understand that NHL officials have extremely tough jobs and that the pressure they deal with is unimaginable, but they have that pressure because things like this routinely happen. The course of Saturday's game would've been completely altered had the Flyers been rightly credited with the Gagne's goal on this play. I'm not saying we would've necessarily been talking about a Philadelphia win, but we certainly wouldn't have been talking about the officiating for 24 hours.
56 comments
|
1 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
The game was played in Pittsburgh.
NHL rules are different there… didn’t you know?
Come on Mario just because your skates are turned like that and you body is leaning back and away from the goalie doesn’t mean you were really trying to avoid contact with the goaltender.
Just Call Me "M"!
Clearly trying to stop in front of the goalie wasn’t reasonable. He should’ve allowed Fleury a five foot halo to go about his business unbothered. OF COURSE that’s what the referee 50 feet away at center ice saw and immediately spent three minutes explaining.
I never said Leino didn’t try to stop, I just said that the refs had legal ground to stand on if they thought he didn’t try to stop. It’s not like they could go back and review it.
by Hatt the Moople on Mar 28, 2010 5:55 PM EDT up reply actions
I just said that the refs had legal ground to stand on if they thought he didn’t try to stop
And you were, are, and forever will be wrong in making that argument. In fact, they had no basis other than Rule 87(b).
They did have legal ground, if they thought at that moment that Lieno didn’t try to stop. But hey, lets claim a conspiracy theory again, because that makes more sense.
by Hatt the Moople on Mar 28, 2010 5:58 PM EDT up reply actions
Not at home, the PVR is picking it up.
by Hatt the Moople on Mar 28, 2010 6:05 PM EDT up reply actions
There’s a magical land between conspiracy theory and legal ground for the call names “Blown Call.” That’s where most of us reside.
There’s no point continuing this argument with Mario D. Feel free to contribute to conversation in any other way.
Hey Snevik, I don’t know about you but I am going to ask Mario to come over to my house some weekend and argue with my wife. He has to do better than I can. She just wears me down after ten minutes and I cave. If I arm Mario with some facts maybe I can get a couple things worked out.
Just Call Me "M"!
They spent 3 minutes reviewing the jumbotron in order to change the call on the ice which was GOAL!
Just Call Me "M"!
One ref thought it was a goal, the other ref thought it was a no-goal. They conferred, and the wrong side came out on top. The only way to fix that would be to make calls like this reviewable.
by Hatt the Moople on Mar 28, 2010 5:58 PM EDT up reply actions
That might not have worked out in your favor last night. There probably would’ve been a lot of pine boxes crossing PA.
by Hatt the Moople on Mar 28, 2010 6:00 PM EDT up reply actions
The problem is that the correct call was made, then the refs on the ice illegally reviewed it by watching the jumbotron. The simple fact that it was reviewed and the incorrect call came out on top should blow that argument out of the water.
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
by Geoff Detweiler on Mar 28, 2010 6:00 PM EDT up reply actions
Most of the time when that happens, the first ref just tells the second he’s wrong. In a case like this, where clearly neither is 100% sure, they should be able to go upstairs. It’s the only way the right call can be made.
by Hatt the Moople on Mar 28, 2010 6:04 PM EDT up reply actions
They should be able to go upstairs…by upstairs does not mean view the jumbo tron, which they clearly can not do, but they did it in this case.
That’s what I meant. For calls like this, they should let the refs go to Toronto at their own discretion to get the call right.
by Hatt the Moople on Mar 28, 2010 6:22 PM EDT up reply actions
Don’t mention Toronto and the FSNPitt broadcasting network. It is a real touchy subject around here.
Just Call Me "M"!
I suppose, eh? Didn’t that dude get fired, though? If he wasn’t, he should’ve been.
by Hatt the Moople on Mar 28, 2010 6:25 PM EDT up reply actions
Yeah, I agree. But here, assuming neither was 100%, why the hell do you defer to the guy trailing the play? That’s always been a problem of mine. I absolutely hate when the trailing ref calls a penalty that the ref 5 feet away didn’t call.
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
by Geoff Detweiler on Mar 28, 2010 6:27 PM EDT up reply actions
wait a second-you are inferring too much in that statement. you have no idea what the refs are thinking.
by NHL rules and regulations, there was no legal way to overturn that goal. the referee himself ruled incidental contact.
Eat what the monkey eats, then eat the monkey. -U.S. Navy survival guidance
If the player didn’t make reasonable effort to avoid contact, the goal can be waived. That’s the only way. The second ref botched the call, and the first one should’ve been sure enough to tell him to piss off.
by Hatt the Moople on Mar 28, 2010 6:16 PM EDT up reply actions
Also, you have a really interesting way of
never sa[ying] Leino didn’t try to stop
If you look at his trajectory before he got tripped, he’s heading right for Fleury. Before the trip, he doesn’t appear to adjust himself to miss the goaltender. A credible argument could have been made either way for the call.
The rule discusses "no reasonable effort." Lieno got tripped, but he didn’t twist to try to get out of the way, he didn’t try to avoid contact, he just fell on him, impeding his ability to make the stop.
And by “interesting” I mean: You’re completely full of shit and you did exactly that.
Notice: “A credible argument could have been made either way.” I spent the start of that conversation saying that the refs could have thought he didn’t try to get out of the way. Somebody had to play devil’s advocate in there.
by Hatt the Moople on Mar 28, 2010 6:02 PM EDT up reply actions
Notice:
“I never said Leino didn’t try to stop.”
“Lieno.. didn’t twist to try to get out of the way, he didn’t try to avoid contact, he just fell on him.”
As he was falling (which that post refers to) did try to twist or get out of the way? That’s the point I was making, it happened so fast, the refs could argue either way.
by Hatt the Moople on Mar 28, 2010 6:07 PM EDT up reply actions
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PrkR7ih6f3M&feature=player_embedded
Maybe one day soon Lavvy will react this way.
Hopefully the Flyers do a better job of pretending not to laugh.
by Hatt the Moople on Mar 28, 2010 6:27 PM EDT up reply actions
I think every visiting player gets some sort of a local tax taken from playing in the city.
Just Call Me "M"!
Good call.
http://www.philly.com/philly/news/breaking/20091130_Jock_tax_is_pay_dirt_for_local_governments.html
Broad Street Hockey - SBN's Philadelphia Flyers blog. Got goaltending? Searching since 1987.
by Travis Hughes on Mar 28, 2010 6:39 PM EDT up reply actions
Interesting. I am not sure how I feel about this…they are pro athletes who make a ton but at the same point…it doesn’t seem right to have a tax like this, you are almost punishing people for being good at their jobs. Seems ridiculous.
No actually they look at it like you came to our town to earn a living and for that living there is a tax. If you are a working class schlub and sub contract in Philly sure as shit you are going to pay a tax. That is why the Flyers years ago moved practice facility to NJ because they only pay a tax for game days.
Just Call Me "M"!
After seeing this game and the last 2 years of games I think Flyers just need to close down it is obivous that the NHL is never ever going to be fair to the Flyers they secertly want us gone. We will never win another stanley cup. Kicked goal by crosby aloowed beat us twice in the ployoffs the goal earlier and the bad penelties now this it is plain as day.
I wasn't even a year old but I stayed up to be outside the Vet with my Dad and Mom when the Phillies won the World Series 1980.
Logic FAIL
Trying to pull up when it’s too late is not the same as making a reasonable effort to avoid contact. That’s like saying the guy who ran the red light and t-boned your car wasn’t at fault because he happened to hit the brakes on his way into the intersection.
by PensAreYourDaddy on Mar 30, 2010 10:31 PM EDT reply actions
Glad you showed up days after the conversation ended. If Fleury wasn’t a mile outside of his crease, there would’ve been plenty of room for Leino to stop. The real problem is the NHL basically saying guys can’t crash the net anymore.
Broad Street Hockey - SBN's Philadelphia Flyers blog. Got goaltending? Searching since 1987.
by Travis Hughes on Apr 3, 2010 12:28 AM EDT up reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
SBNation.com Recent Stories
In Association With
Latest Puck Daddy - NHL from Yahoo! Sports
- Snow building up: Isles sign Frans Nielsen to 4-year deal, avoid free agency
- Puck Previews: Capitals, Panthers in Southeast showdown; Winter Classic announcement day
- Tribute to Owen Nolan: 10 moments that best celebrate his hockey legacy (Video)
- Puck Headlines: Canucks split Sedins; Ovechkin’s $4M house; Coyotes booster club folds
- The building challenges for Seattle, Quebec City as NHL markets
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
