NHL Playoffs!
Senior Member
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 17,118
Likes: 7
From: Burleson, Texas
The stick did interfere. It impeded Fleury from being able to move his legs. I mean look at the video, it was right between them! That was goaltender interference.OK, I'm done arguing too.
Last edited by Stealth; May 25, 2008 at 02:21 PM. Reason: Added expert hockey knowledge.
Senior Member
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 17,118
Likes: 7
From: Burleson, Texas
Really, you obviously don't know what you're talking about. The replay also clearly shows that his stick in no way prevented him from doing his job.
I'm not going to waste my time arguing anymore....you can say I'm a jaded fan all you want, but I know I'm right.
EDIT: Here's an article explaining the rule and bogus calls:
http://www.bleacherreport.com/articl...at-s-The-Deal-
"In Game 4 against Dallas, Holmstrom was standing outside the crease, screening the goalie as he always does when Pavel Datsyuk scored. The goal was waived off. The only explanation that was given was that Holmstrom's butt was in the crease. Huh?
Last night, in Game 1 against Pittsburgh in the Stanley Cup Finals, Holmstrom was again outside of the crease when Lidstrom scored. This goal was immediately waived off as well. The explanation for this one was that Holmstrom hit Marc-Andre Fluery with his stick.
The official NHL rulebook has this to say about goaltender interference:
"Rule 78. B
If an attacking player initiates any contact with a goalkeeper, other than incidental contact, while the goalkeeper is outside his goal crease, and a goal is scored, the goal will be disallowed."
Let's look at the waived off goal in Game 4 against Dallas. Holmstrom was completely outside of the crease, Marty Turco was inside the crease. Holmstrom's butt was ruled to have blocked Turco's vision and so interference was the call and the goal was waived off. There wasn't contact against Turco. This doesn't fit the rule for goaltender interference.
How about Lidstrom's goal last night? Holmstrom was outside the crease and made contact with Fluery with his stick, but take a closer look. Fluery skated out of the crease to run into Holmstrom's stick.
Fluery initiated the contact and so this must be called incidental contact, so according to the rules this also was not goaltender interference. Yet, the goal was waived off AND Holmstrom was issued a penalty.
Both goals were waived off by referee Dan O'Halloran, who incidently also waived off a goal due to Holmstrom in the regular season. O'Halloran clearly either doesn't understand Rule 78.B or just has a personal vendetta against Tomas Holmstrom. Either way, something has to happen here."
I'm not going to waste my time arguing anymore....you can say I'm a jaded fan all you want, but I know I'm right.
EDIT: Here's an article explaining the rule and bogus calls:
http://www.bleacherreport.com/articl...at-s-The-Deal-
"In Game 4 against Dallas, Holmstrom was standing outside the crease, screening the goalie as he always does when Pavel Datsyuk scored. The goal was waived off. The only explanation that was given was that Holmstrom's butt was in the crease. Huh?
Last night, in Game 1 against Pittsburgh in the Stanley Cup Finals, Holmstrom was again outside of the crease when Lidstrom scored. This goal was immediately waived off as well. The explanation for this one was that Holmstrom hit Marc-Andre Fluery with his stick.
The official NHL rulebook has this to say about goaltender interference:
"Rule 78. B
If an attacking player initiates any contact with a goalkeeper, other than incidental contact, while the goalkeeper is outside his goal crease, and a goal is scored, the goal will be disallowed."
Let's look at the waived off goal in Game 4 against Dallas. Holmstrom was completely outside of the crease, Marty Turco was inside the crease. Holmstrom's butt was ruled to have blocked Turco's vision and so interference was the call and the goal was waived off. There wasn't contact against Turco. This doesn't fit the rule for goaltender interference.
How about Lidstrom's goal last night? Holmstrom was outside the crease and made contact with Fluery with his stick, but take a closer look. Fluery skated out of the crease to run into Holmstrom's stick.
Fluery initiated the contact and so this must be called incidental contact, so according to the rules this also was not goaltender interference. Yet, the goal was waived off AND Holmstrom was issued a penalty.
Both goals were waived off by referee Dan O'Halloran, who incidently also waived off a goal due to Holmstrom in the regular season. O'Halloran clearly either doesn't understand Rule 78.B or just has a personal vendetta against Tomas Holmstrom. Either way, something has to happen here."
Senior Member
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 17,118
Likes: 7
From: Burleson, Texas
