Das neue musik Forum!! » between Central Division rivals. Bu

Got a question on rule clarification, comments on rule enforcements or some memorable NHL stories? Kerry wants to answer your emails at cmonref@tsn.ca. Hi Kerry! In the first and second period of the Ottawa-St. Louis game last night, there were two disallowed goals against Ottawa, one on Erik Condra and one on Chris Neil. Im just wondering if you agreed with the referees call on the ice. First disallowed goal: Condra is on the rush and gets a squeaker through Brian Elliott. The puck was never covered, nor frozen, but the play is called dead by the referee behind the net, where he can see the puck at all times. I think that this is a make-up call because of the disallowed goal against St. Louis not long before. Second disallowed goal: A shot is taken, there is a scramble in front of the net. Chris Butler on St. Louis knocks over Elliott and the puck is loose. An Ottawa player then gets a shot off and the puck is near the goal line. It is at this point where Butler kicks the puck into his own net. The puck is already half way to the back of the net before the whistle was blown. Incidental contact with the goalie. The only person that made direct contact with the goalie was Butler. Just wondering. Andrew S. from Renfrew, ON ----- Hey Kerry, Id love to get your expert opinion on all the disallowed goals in the Ottawa-St. Louis game and overall absolute inconsistent officiating in this game in general! The first Ottawa goal was clearly a case of a loose puck - where Brian Elliott was still searching up until it was in the back of the net - both Erik Condra and Ian Cole were still looking for the puck - I was in disbelief that the whistle went. The second goal - clearly a case where a loose puck is pushed to the side of the net vacant to Elliott as Chris Butler cross-checked Condra to the opposite side as well, while catching the right leg of Elliott. It is very clear as well on this play that Condra stopped up and both he and Neil were looking for the loose puck while colliding with the Butler and the several back checking Blues forwards. You can pull the rule book and say the goalie has to be able to make the save and play within his crease and the official blows his whistle when he decides to. But theres has been such a distraught and overwhelming response to the inconsistency of the no-goal and goalie interference/unable to do his job by fans this season, because every single time in every different game, on any given night, the rule seems to change or have a different outcome. I would love to hear your take on these calls. I have asked for your opinion many times, especially concerning the craziness around goalie related calls! Cory Bicker Hi Andrew and Cory: There was also a Blues disallowed goal scored by Jaden Schwartz just 2:42 in before a quick whistle negated a legitimate shorthanded goal scored by Erik Condra. Fair is fair gentlemen, so we must credit referee Dan ORourke for making an excellent, decisive judgment to disallow the Schwartz goal following the incidental contact initiated by Jori Lehtera of the Blues. Whats important to note is how the referee positioned himself in such a manner ahead of the goal line halfway between the side boards and the near goal post. From this prime real estate the ref had a face-on view through the goal crease where Lehtera made himself bigger with his right elbow to turn Ottawa goalkeeper Robin Lehner, in addition to what was taking place on the opposite side of the net. In the instant goalie interference resulted, the puck was travelling to the opposite side of the net onto the stick of Schwartz for a gimme-redirect off a nifty pass from Kevin Shattenkirk. Far too often we see referees become puck watchers! This play demonstrates a textbook case of how a referee set himself to take in the entire play from the first pass to goalie interference to the puck entering the net. Referee ORourke followed the No. 1 rule of real estate - location, location, location and his keen awareness paid dividends. A couple of minutes later we saw a different result when referee Frederick LEceyer saw the initial shot by Condra, on a shorthanded rush, appear to be gobbled up and covered by Brian Elliott in the butterfly position. Elliott remained statuesque and the referee assumed that the puck was covered as he looked through the left pad of the goalkeeper from a distant position gliding below the goal line. Condra had the lead lane close to the top of the goal crease and ahead of Blues defender Ian Cole. A probable concern was created in the mind of the referee that Condra might crash into Elliottt thereby knocking the puck and the goalkeeper into the net. The still picture shows the whistle being blow by the referee with an obstructed view of the loose puck located between Elliotts open pads. Hindsight is 20-20, but the young referee should have demonstrated more patience with his whistle while moving his skates quickly toward the back of the net to make sure the puck was not exposed and available to be played. If Condra happened to dig at Elliotts equipment or initiate contact with the goalie the referee still had the option to blow his whistle at that point and/or disallow any resulting goal. There is no sugar-coating that the whistle was blown prematurely and in error by the referee. If he could have sucked the wind out of his whistle Im quick certain he would have done so. The expanded and broader discretion granted to video review could not be utilized in this case to allow the goal since it was not one continuous play. The whistle was blown prematurely following Condras initial shot. Condra then made a second play on the loose puck to put it into the net. Rule 38.4 (viii) allows video review to assist the Referees in determining the legitimacy of all potential goals (to ensure they are good hockey goals). This would also include situations whereby the Referee stops play or is in the process of stopping the play because he has lost sight of the puck and it is subsequently determined by video review that the puck crosses (or has crossed) the goal line and enters the net as the culmination of a continuous play where the result was unaffected by the whistle (i.e., the timing of the whistle was irrelevant to the puck entering the net at the end of a continuous play). Im still waiting for a quick whistle situation to be determined by video review that a good hockey goal will result. The disallowed Ottawa goal with 6:02 remaining in the second period was also a good hockey goal and should have been credited to Chris Neil after Chris Butler kicked the puck across the goal line. There was way too much going on in the goal crease on this play for any referee to have even less than 50-50 chance at getting the call right. While the still photo demonstrates that referee ORourke didnt have the best position and attack angle to make an accurate judgment on this crease scrum it does highlight the need for either a referees video review of potential crease violations or a Coachs Challenge. Any incidental contact and subsequent injury that Blues goalkeeper Elliott suffered was as a result of his own player, Butler, shoving Condra from behind and onto the goalies right leg. Condra was outside the blue paint when he was pushed from behind by Butler and launched into the crease. You dont want me to pull the rule book out Cory, but Rule 69 supports your claim that a legal goal resulted where it states: If an attacking player has been pushed, shoved, or fouled by a defending player so as to cause him to come into contact with the goalkeeper, such contact will not be deemed contact initiated by the attacking player for the purposes of this rule, provided the attacking player has made a reasonable effort to avoid such contact. Condra was clearly pushed by Butler onto Elliott. Condra had no option to avoid contact with the Blues goalkeeper, reasonable or otherwise. For the past three years I have recommended that the referees need the opportunity to review these types of plays from a monitor in the penalty box. Brian Burke and Brian Murray recommended the implementation of this very process at a meeting during the summer. It would appear studies are ongoing? The very best real estate from which the refs could get this call right was from a secure location inside the penalty box looking at a review monitor. wholesale nfl jerseys . Calgary finished atop the CFL standings with a 14-4 record and earned the right to host the West Division final at McMahon Stadium on Nov. cheap jerseys . The thunderous cheers quickly changed to an appreciative chant: "Ma-son! Ma-son! Ma-son! Headed to New York with new life, Mason sure earned this curtain call. http://www.salecheapchinajerseys.com/ . -- Lara Gut of Switzerland regained the overall World Cup lead with Sundays super-G win in Lake Louise, Alta. wholesale jerseys . Griffin scored 13 of his 31 points in the final 7:05 and Dudley got 11 of his 20 points in the third quarter, leading the defending Pacific Division champions to a 112-85 victory over the Charlotte Bobcats on Wednesday night. "Dud is a shooter. cheap nfl jerseys .C. -- LeBron James called comments on an audio recording of a man identified as Los Angeles Clippers owner Donald Sterling "appalling" and said hes not sure if he would suit up for the remainder of the NBA playoffs if he played for the Clippers.CHICAGO -- Corey Crawford was there every time. Slap shots, wristers, backhands and tips, he stopped each one of them. The Chicago Blackhawks needed a rebound game from their goaltender, and he delivered in a big way. Crawford made 34 saves in his third career post-season shutout, and the Blackhawks got back into their playoff series with the St. Louis Blues with a 2-0 victory in Game 3 on Monday night. "Im just going shot by shot," Crawford said. "Its all I could do the whole game was worry about the next one and focus on the next shot and stop that. I dont want anything else going through my mind through that hockey game." Jonathan Toews and Marcus Kruger scored as the defending Stanley Cup champions bounced back after a pair of overtime losses in St. Louis. Toews 21st post-season goal was only the second score by a Blackhawks forward in the series. "Three games in a row. Its been a very intense series and extremely close," Blackhawks coach Joel Quenneville said. Ryan Miller shook off another slow start and finished with 23 saves, but Toews shot at 4:10 of the first went through the goaltenders legs and was the only score for most of the game. "Its not a good goal. Well leave it at that," Miller said. It was quite a turnaround for Crawford, who was upset with his play after Saturdays 4-3 loss. Barret Jackmans winning goal in Game 2 went through Crawford, prompting the goaltender to say he had to play better for Chicago to win. Quenneville met with Crawford on Sunday, and he responded with one of the best games of his career. "We have a lot of one-on-one meetings throughout the season, but we get ramped up at playoff time," said Quenneville, a former NHL defenceman. "I generally stay away from the goalies. We chatted. Basically I was commending him on accepting that responsibility (for the loss)." Crawford drew chants of "Co-rey! Co-rey from the capacity crowd at the United Center. He was helped by a sound performance by Duncan Keith and Chicagos defencemen, who stepped up without the suspended Brent Seabrook. The Blackhawks killed three St. Louis power plays, while the Blues penalty-kill unit went 4 for 4, including a 5-on-3 disadvantage in the second. "We knew this was going to be a long series, but we really played hard, we really played well," St. Louis coach Ken Hitchcock said. "We did a lott of the things we needed to do to win the hockey game, but youve got to give their goaler credit.dddddddddddd He was good, especially late." The Blues, who scored tying goals late in regulation in each of the first two games, pulled Miller with 57 seconds left, but the Blackhawks held on. Kruger stuffed home an empty-netter in the final seconds. Game 4 is Wednesday night. Each team was without a key contributor after Seabrook wiped out Blues centre David Backes with a big hit in Game 2. The five-minute major and game misconduct penalty for Seabrook led to Vladimir Tarasenkos tying power-play goal with 6.4 seconds left. Seabrook was suspended for three games by the NHL, putting Sheldon Brookbank in the lineup for the first time in the series. Playing with Keith, Brookbank turned in a solid performance in his 19th career playoff game. While Backes was out with an upper-body injury, centre Patrik Berglund returned for the Blues after missing three games. Berglund, who had 14 goals and 18 assists this season, skated behind the net for a nice wraparound opportunity in the first period, but was turned away by Chicago defenceman Nick Leddy. Seabrooks hit on Backes, and at least one knee-on-knee blow by Bryan Bickell, increased the tension between Central Division rivals. But Game 3 was surprisingly civil, with each team wary of another penalty that could swing the series. There was a lot of chirping from each side, and that was about it. Looking for a spark, Quenneville put Toews, Patrick Kane and Bickell on the same line for the start of Game 3. The trio had a lot of success in the Blackhawks run to the title last year. The move worked. Toews connected from the top of the left point in the first, beating Miller with a shot that took an unusual bounce. Bickell also created a couple of quality chances with some slick passing. "If thats how its going to go in, then were doing a good job of taking care of the clean chances and the easier ones for them," said Blues defenceman Kevin Shattenkirk, who was right in front of Toews on the goal. "We just have to keep going." NOTES: Blues F Vladimir Sobotka went to the locker room after he took a power-play shot off his right arm in the second, but he returned later in the period. ... The announced attendance of 22,112 was the 268th consecutive sellout for the Blackhawks, counting the playoffs. ' ' '