I think we got lucky with that call...it looked like a good goal to me.
BTW, I spoke with OGC after the game tonight. The refs informed him that an Brown player bumped into Diebold which caused him to turn away from the net and when he got back into position, the puck was in the net. They called it incidental goaltender interference (a new one to me) which is not a penalty, but simply a face off outside the zone. FYI.
My take from the catwalk (although I was not on the air)...The waved off Brown goal was obvious to me. I think the only reason it was reviewed was that Whittet asked for it, I don't think there was any chance they were going to reverse it. It looked like they also had signaled a penalty on Brown, but obviously none was called. The penalty on DeVito, I could see coming a mile away, and it was NOT a bad call by the refs at any means. In fact, I had the clipboard in my hand to write down the penalty before it was even called. At no point though did I think that RPI was going to lose. They need to play like this (minus the penalties) the rest of the way, and take 12 points.
I recall that you complained that you did not get a seat cushion.
I was on the air for the first intermission only, whatever Kurt and Ryan said about me, I was not privvy too. Kurt had a beef with me last night anyway.
BTW, I spoke with OGC after the game tonight. The refs informed him that an Brown player bumped into Diebold which caused him to turn away from the net and when he got back into position, the puck was in the net. They called it incidental goaltender interference (a new one to me) which is not a penalty, but simply a face off outside the zone. FYI.
The rule is that if the man is in the crease and is either screening the goaltender or physically preventing the goaltender from moving into position to attempt to block the shot, it is a crease violation. This is a paraphrase of what is in the rulebook, but the essence of the rule is there.
Why is it Hicks is always involved with these sorts of calls? He trying to get redemption from three years ago?
BTW, I spoke with OGC after the game tonight. The refs informed him that an Brown player bumped into Diebold which caused him to turn away from the net and when he got back into position, the puck was in the net. They called it incidental goaltender interference (a new one to me) which is not a penalty, but simply a face off outside the zone. FYI.
I should look at the video again. On the replay I didn't see the bump...all I saw was a Brown skate very briefly and marginally going in and out of the crease before the puck arrived. But if there was a bump before that, it might have been the right call.
I should look at the video again. On the replay I didn't see the bump...all I saw was a Brown skate very briefly and marginally going in and out of the crease before the puck arrived. But if there was a bump before that, it might have been the right call.
Have to agree with you-I uspect that brown got hosed a bit on that call. But that is something we know all about from multiple episodes against us in the past. Personally-i think that was a good goal.
Take the shortest distance to the puck and arrive in ill humor
Have to agree with you-I uspect that brown got hosed a bit on that call. But that is something we know all about from multiple episodes against us in the past. Personally-i think that was a good goal.
Personally, I thought that it was a make up call. They had already scored one goal on the two man advantage. And after SA's argument when the penalties were called, I don't think that the officials wanted to grant two goals on that call. JMO.
Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.
Benjamin Franklin
The harder I practice, the luckier I get.
Gary Player
Comment