Matt Beleskey Disallowed Goal vs. Boston

[OzFlyer]

Anyone else see this??

Marty Turco set himself deep in his crease. Andrew Cogliano stopped in advance of any contact with Turco but provided a screen well inside the top of the goal crease line. Had Turco attempted to move out in his crease to reestablish position and as a result made contact with Cogliano a clear violation of rule 69.3 would result and the goal would be disallowed. That did not happen in this case.

My suggestion was to allow the referee the advantage of video review to assist him in making the correct ruling on goalkeeper interference. This call is not only the most difficult one the refs often have to make but one that can have the greatest impact on the outcome of a game. Since a review process isn't going to be implemented for interference on the goalkeeper expect more conferences in the referee's crease to take place and long distance calls to be made.

Since Marty Turco was content with the position he assumed within his goal crease I would have allowed the goal to stand just like the referee on the goal line. In this case, with Anaheim 11 points out of a playoff spot it might appear as though it just water off a Duck's back. Good luck trying to convince coach Bruce Boudreau of that!

For a personally autographed copy of Final Call from TSN hockey analyst and former NHL referee Kerry Fraser, visit The Book Keeper website.

Edited March 26, 2012 by OzFlyer

[fishbulb]

Horseshit call imo... they got robbed.

Perfect example for those people that want a coach to have a "flag" to review/overturn calls during a game.

[flyercanuck]

@OzFlyer

BS call. Matt is a good friend of mines son...and a way better player than his dad..LOL!

[fishbulb]

Here's Kerry Fraser's take on the situation.

http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/story/?id=391438

[Digityman]

@OzFlyer

BS call.

The rules should be clear and this shouldn't happen.

[AndyS]

Bad call. I was watching that game & just assumed it was a goal.