King Knut Posted January 17, 2019 Share Posted January 17, 2019 ...the one that prevented Coots' 4th goal. I Would really like to get another look at that for research purposes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mkscrewy Posted January 17, 2019 Share Posted January 17, 2019 i don't have one but it was clear interference by a guy who didn't have a stick and probably not a choice but to take that penalty. Are you thinking it should've been a penalty shot? we probably would have missed it even then—even with the empty net. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ruxpin Posted January 17, 2019 Share Posted January 17, 2019 2 hours ago, mkscrewy said: i don't have one but it was clear interference by a guy who didn't have a stick and probably not a choice but to take that penalty. Are you thinking it should've been a penalty shot? we probably would have missed it even then—even with the empty net. Lol The net was empty so by rule Coots would have simply been awarded the goal. I think, though, that the rule is that it would have to be something that would have been awarded a penalty shot had the goalie been in. I don't think Coots was clearly ahead of him, so I'm not sure it would have been. Just a minor penalty. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Knut Posted January 17, 2019 Author Share Posted January 17, 2019 4 hours ago, mkscrewy said: i don't have one but it was clear interference by a guy who didn't have a stick and probably not a choice but to take that penalty. Are you thinking it should've been a penalty shot? we probably would have missed it even then—even with the empty net. No, if a penalty shot is warranted with the goalie pulled in the NHL, the Flyers and Coots would just have been awarded the goal straight out. No shot needed. It's been brushed under the rug because they won anyway, but the fact of the matter is, it should likely have been 5-3 and Coots should have 20 goals now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Knut Posted January 17, 2019 Author Share Posted January 17, 2019 1 hour ago, ruxpin said: Lol The net was empty so by rule Coots would have simply been awarded the goal. I think, though, that the rule is that it would have to be something that would have been awarded a penalty shot had the goalie been in. I don't think Coots was clearly ahead of him, so I'm not sure it would have been. Just a minor penalty. Right? Which is why I want to watch it again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ruxpin Posted January 17, 2019 Share Posted January 17, 2019 1 hour ago, King Knut said: Right? Which is why I want to watch it again. I haven't seen it since the broadcast either. I'm hoping someone obliges you because I'd like to see it again myself. So, your understanding of the rule is the same? Both the NHL and NFL have nuanced so many of their rules that I'm left guessing on some of it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Knut Posted January 17, 2019 Author Share Posted January 17, 2019 21 minutes ago, ruxpin said: I haven't seen it since the broadcast either. I'm hoping someone obliges you because I'd like to see it again myself. So, your understanding of the rule is the same? Both the NHL and NFL have nuanced so many of their rules that I'm left guessing on some of it. Yeah, that's my understanding of the rule.. that if an infraction occurs with the goalie pulled that would have resulted in a penalty shot, the penalty shot is foregone and the goal is automatically awarded to the player and the team. I have it DVR'd I just haven't had time to fast forward through the whole damn game to watch it again. Maybe tonight. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cheesesteak Posted January 17, 2019 Share Posted January 17, 2019 Here ya go....go to 19:00 mark to see live, slo-mo view starts around 19:40 http://nhlreplays.com/nhlreplay/Boston-Bruins-vs-Philadelphia-Flyers-NHL-JAN-16-2019-2030-EST-ol4/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Knut Posted January 18, 2019 Author Share Posted January 18, 2019 15 hours ago, Cheesesteak said: Here ya go....go to 19:00 mark to see live, slo-mo view starts around 19:40 http://nhlreplays.com/nhlreplay/Boston-Bruins-vs-Philadelphia-Flyers-NHL-JAN-16-2019-2030-EST-ol4/ Thanks! Watched it again at home too. Its a tough call. A really tough call. Based on the way the rule is written you could take it either way. The empty net net and the broken stick change everything. Is is it a clear scoring chance on a breakaway? No. But it would it have been a clear goal? Yes. So it actually is a pretty 100% scoring chance. If the goalie wasnt pulled, he coukd have played it and eliminated the scoring chance. Rereading the rule and watching it again, I think it’s just a judgement call for the ref. He’s not wrong, but I don’t think giving Coots the goal would have been incorrect either. If Gordon was a Quennville, Trotz, Julien type, he could have yapped the refs ear off about it and I kinda wish he would have because even though that stuff doesn’t work in the moment, it does stick in their heads and they give you the benefit of the doubt later If they think they might have screwed you once before. Yet another reason why I hated Hakstol as a coach. He didn’t understand how to play those games with the refs and i believe it actually cost the Flyers A LOT of points over the years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ruxpin Posted January 18, 2019 Share Posted January 18, 2019 39 minutes ago, King Knut said: Yet another reason why I hated Hakstol as a coach. He didn’t understand how to play those games with the refs and i believe it actually cost the Flyers A LOT of points over the years. In addition to all the points lost just because he was behind the bench? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Knut Posted January 18, 2019 Author Share Posted January 18, 2019 1 hour ago, ruxpin said: In addition to all the points lost just because he was behind the bench? There are a LOT of reasons. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.