Andrei Markov gets 3 games

[RadioGaGa 162]

Well Chadd...it appears we'll know tomorrow how it all works. Just read on the Montreal Forum that Hainsey has been called up. When local TV did the story, they commented "Let's just hope no one else picks him up"

[Chadd 916]

The contact between the two skaters was incidental, neither guy did anything against the rules to the other guy.

They both went down, thus no scoring chance created or denied.

They both made contact with the goalie while off their feet and out of control, it was not their intent to make contact with the goalie.

The contact prevented the goalie from getting across to make the save, hence the whistle.

If there had not been a goal, there would have been no whistle. You don't stop play for something that isn't a penalty.

The defending player was attempting to get body position on his man and did nothing illegal to the attacking player.

The attacking player was trying to get body position on the defender and did nothing illegal to the defending player.

While the attacker was sliding on the ice and unable to change directions or stop, he made enough contact as to prevent the goalie from making an attempt to stop the shot.

No penalty is possible to the defending player as he did nothing wrong. No penalty is possible on the attacking player for the contact with the defender for the same reason. The only potential case for a penalty is against the attacker on the goalie and at that point the attacker was off of his feet and sliding. There was obviously no intent to make contact with the goalie on the part of the attacker and since there was contact with the defender that caused him to go down, the attacker was obviously not in a position to determine the path he would be sliding.

So, it doesn't matter that the player(s) that made contact with teh goalie and the players that caused the puck to enter the net weren't the same. The player(s) that hit Belfour weren't the players that directed the puck into the net, but the contact with the goalie supersedes the other play????

Do I have that right?

Thank you for the explanation btw...very nicely done. (it's the only way I'll learn)

It doesn't matter at all what player it was as long as one of the attacking players was involved. The premise is that an attacking player, through no fault of his own, prevented the goalie from making a save. Ergo the whistle and no penalty.

  The Hab was actually Markov. In my perhaps slightly biased opinion I thought it was a terrible call as it appeared Kronwall took Markov out and then the pass just happened to direct off Markov into the net.

Your Habs avatar leads me to believe that you have a slightly biased view of the incident. :D

[kosydar 0]

and whats all this talk of Dandenault being a great skater? I think that might be the most wrongly overstated fact in the NHL. He has above average speed but the guy can barly do a crossover.

No love for Dandenault? You're totally wrong. He is easily one of the top skaters in the league, defenseman or forward. If anything, he is one of the must underrated players in the NHL. Him leaving Detroit is a good thing for his career I think. Hopefully he'll be able to step up and become one of the Hab's top defenseman by the end of the year.

[MaverickFBI 0]

This goalie interference thing should be clear for ALL the refs.

I watched an nhl highlight yesterday and both D and A finished in the net... with the puck... net off moorings... and a goal was awarded !!!!

That's so stupid !

IMO it's the big flaw of this new NHL

[Chadd 916]

This goalie interference thing should be clear for ALL the refs.

I watched an nhl highlight yesterday and both D and A finished in the net... with the puck... net off moorings... and a goal was awarded !!!!

That's so stupid !

IMO it's the big flaw of this new NHL

I've seen at least 10 that should have been disallowed because of goalie contact. On a couple of them the broadcasters said that the NHL office in Toronto was on the phone with the replay officials. I think in the early going the NHL wanted to have as many goals as possible count, with any luck they are starting to make the correct calls.

[Kovy_Ribs_Fedo 3]

THE PUCK WENT IN before the two players made contact with the goalie, if Belfour is too slow to do the the move to his left, then it's not our fault. Don't get me wrong, I watched this play about 10 times.

Kosydar, I have to agree with Adam91, Dandenault barely know how to do a crossover, he might be fast in straight line but nothing else, I thought he could replace Brisebois, not at all.

[Eazy_b97 1]

No it wasn't. Belfour tried to move over and get to it, but he couldn't be they were in the way. You see him trying to move that way with them blocking him. I also don't get how Kronwall "hauled him down" when Kronwall was infront of him. The knee injury Kronwall sustained was because Markov was on the back of his leg and limited the movement to prevent an injury.

[Kovy_Ribs_Fedo 3]

No it wasn't. Belfour tried to move over and get to it, but he couldn't be they were in the way. You see him trying to move that way with them blocking him. I also don't get how Kronwall "hauled him down" when Kronwall was infront of him. The knee injury Kronwall sustained was because Markov was on the back of his leg and limited the movement to prevent an injury.

then if Markov was behind he did not hit Belfour, why was it disawolled?

Anyway, I still say it was in before they hit Belfour. I still don't understand why they didn't went upstairs to see if it was a good call or not.

[Eazy_b97 1]

You can't go upstairs on that call, just like you they couldn't go upstairs on Sundin's goal in Carolina. It's a play which is up to the referee. They can't go upstairs to see if it's a trip because it's a judgement call. Markov knocked Kronwall down, they both fell, and both went into the goalie. They were right beside eachother. Chadd already explained why it was dissallowed. Incidental contact with eachother which lead to contact with the goalie.

[Kovy_Ribs_Fedo 3]

You can't go upstairs on that call, just like you they couldn't go upstairs on Sundin's goal in Carolina. It's a play which is up to the referee. They can't go upstairs to see if it's a trip because it's a judgement call. Markov knocked Kronwall down, they both fell, and both went into the goalie. They were right beside eachother. Chadd already explained why it was dissallowed. Incidental contact with eachother which lead to contact with the goalie.

No go upstairs to see if it went in before the contact on Belfour.

[Eazy_b97 1]

Checking to see if the puck was in before the whistle is not a reviewable play. It happened the night before in Carolina to Toronto.

[Kovy_Ribs_Fedo 3]

Come on man, it was definatly in before the whistle, I'm sure they can for the contact...

[Eazy_b97 1]

It was in before the whistle, but thats not why it was waived off and no they cannot go upstairs for contact. Both are unreviewable. I believe the whistle issue is because it takes time for the whistle to be put to the refs mouth, and for the sound to hit the microphones. Like I've said, it happened in Carolina. Puck before the whistle is no reviewable. It cost the Leafs the win. Incidental contact, you can't review a judgement call, it's like reviewing a penalty.

The only reason the whistle was even blown was because the puck went into the net. Chadd explained it on the second page.

[Chadd 916]

It was in before the whistle, but thats not why it was waived off and no they cannot go upstairs for contact. Both are unreviewable. I believe the whistle issue is because it takes time for the whistle to be put to the refs mouth, and for the sound to hit the microphones. Like I've said, it happened in Carolina. Puck before the whistle is no reviewable. It cost the Leafs the win. Incidental contact, you can't review a judgement call, it's like reviewing a penalty.

The only reason the whistle was even blown was because the puck went into the net. Chadd explained it on the second page.

The play is over when the referee decides it is over, not when you hear the whistle. Sundin got robbed of a GWG in OT the other night and he didn't whine and bitch like Markov or some of the other Habs. Some guys have class and others don't.

[chippa13 1844]

If the contact between the two skaters was incidental, there is no need for a penalty call. Both guys wee leaning on the other guy and they both went down and both hit the goalie. I thought the whistle and faceoff inside the zone was the correct call.

Having never reffed or been certified in any way shape or form to ref or coach hockey, I'm still confused...

Okay...if the contact is incidental and doesn't necessitate a penaly...why call off a goal that comes from that same contact? I understand goalie contact leads to a goal...that's no goal. If "incidental" contact with the goalie that doesn't warrant a penalty ends with a goal...why does it get called off. I could see if the whistle went before it's in...then it's obvious. This just seems like lots of grey (or is it gray) area to me.

And, no...I don't think Hainsey is on a 2-way. He's played well enough in Hamilton, that if he could go up waiver free....he would have by now.

I haven't seen the play but my guess is that the referee saw the pile up, lost sight of the puck and intended to blow the whistle. The play really ends when the referee decides to blow the whistle, a fraction of time before he actually does. Hence, even though the puck crosses the line before the whistle blows, the goal is still disallowed as the referee intended to stop play before it crossed the line because he lost sight of it.

[MaverickFBI 0]

So true Chadd.

And I'd go further :

When you watch SO, you'll see more and more often the player finishing in the face of the goalie...thrusting him in the net

IMO in this case the refs shouldn't even bother to see if the puck is in the net.

IMO if there is a contact with the goalie (while he's in the crease) thats a no goal. Even if the contact is after the puck went in.

I know that's a long shot but I can't stand anymore this physical intimidation vs the goalies.

What's your opionion on this folks ?