siouxguyinstpaul Posted December 30, 2006 Posted December 30, 2006 How do you feel about that goal in OT last night. It was of course ruled a goal - after about 7-8 minutes of discussion - but should it have been? Quote
Diggler Posted December 30, 2006 Posted December 30, 2006 It was and should've been a goal. Though I'm suprised it was called that way. Even though everyone and their mother knew the puck was in the net because Walz ended up totally in the net, since it went into Walz's breezers you couldn't see it in the net. Quote
siouxguyinstpaul Posted December 30, 2006 Author Posted December 30, 2006 That is why I don't think it should have been called a goal as the play was blown dead after the ref lost sight of it - he probably saw it go into Walz's uniform - but then lost it and blew the whistle as no goal. Quote
Diggler Posted December 30, 2006 Posted December 30, 2006 Walz going into the net and the puck being out of sight were nearly simultaneous. By the time the ref blew the whistle, Walz was in the net with the puck so even if the ref blew the whistle when he lost sight of the puck. Since Walz/the puck were in the net before the whistle blew on the review it became a goal. Quote
siouxguyinstpaul Posted December 30, 2006 Author Posted December 30, 2006 Walz going into the net and the puck being out of sight were nearly simultaneous. By the time the ref blew the whistle, Walz was in the net with the puck so even if the ref blew the whistle when he lost sight of the puck. Since Walz/the puck were in the net before the whistle blew on the review it became a goal. sounds reasonable to me Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.