Holmstrom96 347 Report post Posted November 28, 2009 They haven't been going our way.... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest CaliWingsNut Report post Posted November 28, 2009 Wait... Which call that screwed Cleary tonight? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
edicius 3,269 Report post Posted November 28, 2009 And apparently, this is the same referee that allowed a goal after a Coyotes player pushed Osgood into the goal. So, just so we have it straight... Phantom "incidental contact" = NO GOAL! Goaltender plowed into the net = GOAL!!! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
hooon 1,089 Report post Posted November 28, 2009 Absolutely a terrible call, yet not the least bit surprising. Also the early whistle in the 2nd period was equally as terrible. The refs are pathetic. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
haroldsnepsts 4,826 Report post Posted November 28, 2009 (edited) NM. Wrong thread. Edited November 28, 2009 by haroldsnepsts Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
adubs 8 Report post Posted November 28, 2009 That was absolutely 100% a correct call. It was weak but it is in the rulebook. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Carman 387 Report post Posted November 28, 2009 Shouldn't have been in the crease, if you give the referee a chance to make a judgment call things like that will happen. Especially when nothing else is going your way. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Hockeytown0001 7,652 Report post Posted November 28, 2009 Lol, love Malts. "Why!!" Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Hack & Whack Rule! 160 Report post Posted November 28, 2009 Consistency, or lack thereof, is the problem. Many goals like this, and worse, have been allowed more often than not. Officiating in the NHL is a joke. This proves it. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dat's sick 1,002 Report post Posted November 28, 2009 I absolutely do not see any reason for why that goal shouldn't be allowed. Heels in the crease, sure, but he's not directly interfering with Kipper. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Holmstrom96 347 Report post Posted November 28, 2009 Consistency, or lack thereof, is the problem. Excellent point. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
GSBrooks13 204 Report post Posted November 28, 2009 I have not seen a goal be disallowed because of a crease violation since before the Brett Hull incident. I would expect this kind of bad call with Homer in front of the net because of the reputation but I see no way in which Cleary was causing Kipper any harm. Hell.. When the puck went in the net Kipper was already moving beside Cleary. But I guess when it rains it pours. All we can do is hope for some allowed goals tomorrow night. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
henrik40 76 Report post Posted November 28, 2009 Kipper didn't even argue after the goal was scored. He either didn't think it was interference or maybe saw the ref waving it off right away. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
CrossCheck24 2 Report post Posted November 28, 2009 If you look at 1:07 kipper runs his stick into cleary's skate. would that have stopped the puck? I dunno. but I think thats where the call came from Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
adubs 8 Report post Posted November 28, 2009 (edited) Kipper didn't even argue after the goal was scored. He either didn't think it was interference or maybe saw the ref waving it off right away. Kiprusoff doesn't argue very much unless the interference involves players falling on top of him. Even then it's usually the players arguing. If you look at 1:07 kipper runs his stick into cleary's skate. would that have stopped the puck? I dunno. but I think thats where the call came from The call came from Cleary being in the crease for three or four seconds. Edited November 28, 2009 by adubs Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TheUkrainian 49 Report post Posted November 28, 2009 It didn't even look like Kipper really protested the fact that Cleary was "interfering" with his goal-tending. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Statts 4 Report post Posted November 28, 2009 Rule: If an attacking player establishes a significant position within the goal crease, so as to obstruct the goalkeeper’s vision and impair his ability to defend his goal, and a goal is scored, the goal will be disallowed. For this purpose, a player “establishes a significant position within the crease†when, in the Referee’s judgment, his body, or a substantial portion thereof, is within the goal crease for more than an instantaneous period of time. It was a weak call IMO but Cleary was defiantly walking a fine line in that situation. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
brett 1,029 Report post Posted November 28, 2009 really glad i missed this game i woulda been pissed Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SouthernWingsFan 854 Report post Posted November 28, 2009 Awful call all the way. The phantom interference and intent to blow the whistle rules are absolute jokes. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Rivalred 630 Report post Posted November 28, 2009 Going to get a lot worse before it gets better folks... Gonna be a bumpy ride. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Seraph 240 Report post Posted November 28, 2009 I agree with the call. You can tell the goalie couldn't make as natural of a move as he wanted to make the save due to the fact that Cleary was in the crease. Tough call, but not as bad as the other one we had earlier this year. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Wingooni_19 0 Report post Posted November 28, 2009 As mentioned above the Wings loss is not because of that disallowed goal!! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
hankzet40 233 Report post Posted November 28, 2009 Yeah, leave it up to the ref's discretion and this is what happens. Compared to what's gone against the Wings in the past, this is a good goal IMO. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
HockeyCrazy3033 168 Report post Posted November 28, 2009 God awful call. Horrible. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
deltawing 12 Report post Posted November 28, 2009 Excellent point. Definitely. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
