First of all, I do love to watch Zach Parise. RELENTLESS. Yup. That's him.
How would you call it if you were the referee, stepped into the penalty box to review the goal?
Goalie interference? Yes? No? Duno?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
First off, if we are talking abotu a review... I don't see enough evidence to overturn the call on the ice. I just don't.
ReplyDeleteThis is a good goal for me anyways. In the NHL, in the NCAA, in the NFHS and in USA Hockey. At least for me. The USA Rule book states that a play may not make physical contact with a goalkeeper. Unless it says, the puck is in the crease. now the rule aside, to discuss the argument that the contact made allowed the puck to enter the goal. I don't buy it.
The best view is the overhead shot. Slow it down. Both players are progressing into the mouth of the goal. The initial attempt is made and both player continue toward the mouth of the goal. Parise makes contact with the puck (2nd time) and the goalie at about the same time. I don't believe that the contact made by parise on the goalie prevented him from saving that from being a goal. I believe that regardless of the contact made, that the puck ultimately crosses the goal line and here is why.
Which player actually put this in the net? Hint... It isn't Parise. Look for the Anaheim defensmans stick. The contact was inconsequential and not in violation of the rules in my opinion.
This is a goal.
Goal
ReplyDeleteI think it is a good goal the puck was in the crease before he was and he really didn't prevent the goaltender from playing his position.
ReplyDeleteAlso not knowing the NHL or even Junior rule for that matter as a NFHS official, I cannot go into much detail with the exception that the player had forward momentum that was driving him toward the goal and eventually into the net. He has pos. and control of the puck and the puck was not in contact with his skate as the anouncer said it could have been. The goalie was also being forced back into the goal. I do not believe that Parise interfered with the goalie in playing the puck. This is def. not the first similar incident involving a goalie and player at this level. I find it interesting that when reffing the game in great position, I feel I would make the same call even with the replay. It has to do with my situational awareness. Now of course there could thousands of different circumstances in ym future years of reffing that will affect that and I have only had one game in which I had a goal reviewed as again I only reffing high school and USA and that game was a Minnesota game. Goal is my final call.
ReplyDeleteI have to second what everyone else has said so far. I agree that both players were progressing towards the goal (goaltender included, as he was moving backwards). The puck wasn't kicked in as the Ducks were initially alleging, nor was the contact Parise made with the goalie in violation of the rules as the puck was already in the crease and contact was made with the goalie at the same time. He didn't push the goalie into the net causing the puck to go in, and he didn't interfere with the goalie playing his position.
ReplyDeleteGoal.