If you’re confused about the GI call from last night since Freddie made contact in the crease. It doesnt matter. Stay out of the crease and you don’t have these problems.
If you’re confused about the GI call from last night since Freddie made contact in the crease. It doesnt matter. Stay out of the crease and you don’t have these problems.
16 comments
Nice thanks for this!
I don’t think any of us were confused about the ruling… I think we were all confused that the refs called it in our favor!
We know how much it sucks to be on the Flyers side of this call, more than most teams, like 37 out of 42 times or some ridiculous number like that. It sucks for them. Good or bad call, it’s the call, and we won.
At the end of the season, they don’t ask how, they ask how many.
You’ve got to look at the Toronto copy of the rulebook..
“Rule 69.7.jk: Any acts ruled as goaltender interference under previous parts of this definition will now be allowed to be applied in favor of the Carolina Hurricanes and/or Rod Brind’Amour, rather than only against them as in all previous seasons. (Please see notes regarding the application of this adjustment during the playoffs.)”
Was initially annoyed about this discussion being drawn out, but thanks to it I have a pretty good understanding of goalie interference now. Silver linings.
I perused the Flyers sub and they’re quoting some other regulation that makes it sound like what Freddie did should have allowed the goal. Don’t care though. Also a lot of “I hate Carolina” angst in there as well 🤣
I’ve seen the Canes have goals waved for much, much less.
Seems like 99% of the internet agrees it was pretty clear GI. I was actually shocked at the general consensus bc you know, GI.
So not only was it a no-goal, but shouldn’t the flyers have been penalized?
Freddy also made contact after getting hit with the opposing players stick which pushed his leg back. Like you said though, it doesn’t matter when you’re in the crease and the goalie is trying to get in position.
I was surprised they actually called it in our favor, not because it shouldn’t have been but because they never do!
They also knocked Freddie over in the 3rd period so karma
It’s pretty clear that most Flyers fans are seeing what they want to see in the replays instead of looking for what actually caused the goal to be correctly disallowed. I’ve decided to stop replying to them because most of the people I’ve replied to are willfully ignorant and don’t actually want an explanation.
Sanheim entered the crease without the puck and then moved the goalie with his stick (not intentionally, but he still can’t do that) while the puck was nowhere near the crease and for a long enough time that Andersen couldn’t reset for the next shot. It’s entirely possible that even without the contact from Sanheim, Andersen still might have drifted out of the net before the next shot, but that’s irrelevant to whether it was goalie interference.
The bigger issue is the inconsistency in what is and isn’t GI.
Maybe I’m the only one but it was obvious to me that this was not going to count. In the crease, not pushed by D, contact with goalie preventing him from playing the puck. Textbook GI. What I do find funny is that refs almost never levy the penalty that is supposed to come from such contact. The Canes should have been on a power play after that, not that they needed it.
Had the contact only been on the ice or just the blocker to body contact, I would understand being upset about the call. But there was a whole lot of stick/hand torqueing on his facemask. Pretty obvious GI.
I think the thing most people are missing (which can be seen in NHL.com game highlights) is that Sanheim’s stick looks to get caught in Freddy’s right pad and pushes his leg out, causing him to lose his skate edge. Without the skate edge, he has no chance to move laterally to have a chance to defend the shot. If it was just physical contact with him up high, it probably wouldn’t have gone our way given our luck with GI calls.