Kukla's Korner

Kukla's Korner Hockey

Video- Goal Or Not?

Forget, or can you, that Tomas Holmstrom happens to be involved in the call.

You tell me, goal or not?

Filed in: NHL Teams, Detroit Red Wings, Nashville Predators, | KK Hockey | Permalink
  Tags: tomas+holmstrom

Comments

WingsFanInBeanLand's avatar

Obvious goal.  And I’m not saying that just because I’m a Wing fan.

Had that been the Pen(i)s vs the Ducks or vice versa, I still would say goal.

Posted by WingsFanInBeanLand from Where the GM likes his team. on 03/20/11 at 10:42 AM ET

Avatar

What is this 1992 when a shadow in the crease not allowed?
That was soooooo a goal!

Posted by poyermet on 03/20/11 at 10:47 AM ET

Avatar

No goal

Posted by Cyrus on 03/20/11 at 11:03 AM ET

WingMan's avatar

I can see why ref called it off.  Goalie went off balance just before shot - though I don’t think Holmstrom affected goalies ability to stop shot.  Good screen, shoulda been a goal.

Posted by WingMan from The Q C on 03/20/11 at 11:25 AM ET

Baroque's avatar

Goal.

I think in all cases, if the screener is outside of the crease (especially when contact is initiated by the goaltender), any goal should count. If the contact is in the crease, it shouldn’t. Goaltenders should have full freedom of movement within their crease and should expect to be treated like other hockey players outside of it.

Just because you have a mask and pads shouldn’t make you untouchable anywhere on the ice. Don’t want to be touched - stay inside your crease. Simple.

Posted by Baroque from Michigan on 03/20/11 at 11:47 AM ET

J.J. from Kansas's avatar

Paul, do you have a replay of the Erat elbow?

Also, this should be a goal.  I hope the NHL comes out of the next Board of Governors meeting with a better-defined rule here. 

The refs don’t even consider the limits of the crease anymore when deciding interference and they don’t seem to give consideration one way or another for which player got to that area outside the crease first.  I think the rule is inconsistently applied because it is too vaguely written.

Posted by J.J. from Kansas on 03/20/11 at 12:36 PM ET

Jeff  OKWingnut's avatar

Rank non-objective opinion; good goal.

Objective opinion; that may have been the worst officiated game I have seen all season.

Posted by Jeff OKWingnut from Quest for 12 on 03/20/11 at 12:59 PM ET

Nathan's avatar

Clearly a goal, not as bad a call-back as the one earlier in the year against Dallas, but close.

Goal/no-goal calls should be reviewable for goaltender interference. They are for high-sticks, glove-ins, and kick-ins. There’s no good reason this shouldn’t be.

Posted by Nathan from the scoresheet! on 03/20/11 at 01:07 PM ET

MarkK's avatar

I think it was in the playoffs last year that the NHL published their reasoning for each controversial call the next day on their website, and it was a major positive step towards much needed transparency.  I would love to see the explanation for this one.

Posted by MarkK from Maryland on 03/20/11 at 02:59 PM ET

Primis's avatar

Goal.

My criteria I use for these is this:  If the goalie were Howard, would the goal have been allowed?

And yes, it would have.  Therefore, good goal.

I’m sick and tired of there being a completely separate set of rules for Detroit goals.

Posted by Primis on 03/20/11 at 03:41 PM ET

dmackay14's avatar

I hate the wings. Buts its a goal. No question.

Posted by dmackay14 on 03/20/11 at 03:56 PM ET

calquake's avatar

As I said last night… how can this not be a goal and Nashville’s first goal (where the player is in the blue crease area before the pass/ shot arrives) he tips it in and it counts.  I no longer understand the game of hockey after watching it for over 40 years.

Posted by calquake on 03/20/11 at 06:48 PM ET

UMFan's avatar

Typical bad call, particularly when Homer got to the ice real estate first. If he was in the paint, fine, call off the goal. God only knows why the GM meetings didn’t approve the video review of goals like this. At least it wasn’t the playoffs.

Posted by UMFan from Denver, Colorado on 03/20/11 at 07:07 PM ET

Avatar

goal

Posted by Bill Kaupe on 03/20/11 at 09:20 PM ET

redxblack's avatar

horribly called game all around, and I’m not saying that because of the score.

Posted by redxblack from Akron Ohio on 03/20/11 at 09:58 PM ET

Avatar

Holmstrom is the best in the league at what he does and as a Flames fan it has frustrated me many a time. This one, however, is a reputation call (like some of the calls Bertuzzi gets on the ice). Good goal, called off because it was Holmstrom in front and not anyone else.

Posted by Iggy Rules on 03/20/11 at 10:47 PM ET

Add a Comment

Please limit embedded image or media size to 575 pixels wide.

Add your own avatar by joining Kukla's Korner, or logging in and uploading one in your member control panel.

Captchas bug you? Join KK or log in and you won't have to bother.

Smileys

Notify me of follow-up comments?

Feed

Most Recent Blog Posts

About Kukla's Korner Hockey

Paul Kukla founded Kukla’s Korner in 2005 and the site has since become the must-read site on the ‘net for all the latest happenings around the NHL.

From breaking news to in-depth stories around the league, KK Hockey is updated with fresh stories all day long and will bring you the latest news as quickly as possible.

Email Paul anytime at pk@kuklaskorner.com

 

image

image

image