12/31: WTF is a “Red Wing”?

[fenwaypaul]

Trying to figure out how to screw the Bruins.

 

[Preacher]

He hit Swayman’s glove before Carlo even touched him. And then he hit Sway’s arm.

 

[Salem's Lot]

They’re not getting this. They’re taking forever so they can say inconclusive.

 

[mostman]

He hit Swayman’s glove before Carlo even touched him. And then he hit Sway’s arm.

Right. This is as clear as it can be.

 

[NAR29996]

Clear interference

WTF is taking so long?

 

[katnado]

They're going to get fucked. That's blatant

 

[Curt S Loew]

Is reception bad on the monitor or something?

 

[Preacher]

This is taking forever.

 

[wiffleballhero]

Carlo's stick is the issue

 

[The Napkin]

Maybe the guy in Toronto was in the head?

 

[Gammon_Clark]

Jack’s got jokes…

 

[Salem's Lot]

Knew it

 

[mostman]

Maybe the guy in Toronto was in the head?

Absolutely

 

[Jordu]

What? What?

 

[Gammon_Clark]

Holy fuck, you guys were right. Unbelievable

 

[Diamond Don Aase]

What an epic screw job. They might as well have awarded the Raptors another possession while they were at it.

 

[The Mort Report]

Holy shit they got the rule wrong didn't they?

 

[Murby]

Oh. My. God.

 

[NJ_Sox_Fan]

You have got to be fucking kidding me

 

[barclay]

Outright cheating in my opinion

 

[patinorange]

Worth the challenge

 

[Preacher]

Wow. Just fucked us.

 

[mostman]

The crease doesn’t fucking matter with the stick does it?

 

[katnado]

Lmfao. Called it. That's criminal

 

[LogansDad]

LOL. What a fucking joke.

 

[mostman]

Just making shit up.

 

[Salem's Lot]

Yzerman is popular in the league office so good goal.

 

[Gammon_Clark]

Wow. I hope this lights a fire under the B’s ass. Not that they haven’t been playing well, but I really want to smoke these guys now

 

[Jubjub]

So as soon as Lyon gets a skate outside the blue area, totally ok for someone to clean his clock, right?

 

[Jeff Frye's Face Mask]

What a fucking joke. It wouldn't help them but it would make me feel better seeing Monty just go ballistic and go after the refs. Fire all kinds of shit off the bench at them.

 

[Cotillion]

Holy shit they got the rule wrong didn't they?

I didn’t realize if goalie was out of the goal you can’t interfere.

 

[Curt S Loew]

Oh. I get it now. They were writing a rule, that's why it took so long. Absolute garbage.

 

[Bergs]

What an absolute fuck job.

 

[Gammon_Clark]

One more GA and Swayman is going to fight someone

 

[Salem's Lot]

You better fucking call that ref.

 

[Dewey's 'stache]

Marchand with no zipp on the puck to get that out.

 

[mostman]

My son, who is 6, is demanding an explanation from me and I’m trying my best not to tell him the league hates the Bruins.

 

[ColdSoxPack]

The crease doesn’t matter this was a wrong call.

 

[Gammon_Clark]

Any recourse for the B’s after the game with the league office when a call is so egregious?

 

[Salem's Lot]

Detroit player dove there lol.

 

[NAR29996]

So as soon as Lyon gets a skate outside the blue area, totally ok for someone to clean his clock, right?

Abso-fucking-lutely

 

[Preacher]

Lyon was outside the blue on the shot. Hit him!

 

[Salem's Lot]

Any recourse for the B’s after the game with the league office when a call is so egregious?

If we learned anything from those emails a few years ago, teams are constantly emailing the league about the refs.

 

[Cotillion]

Goals should be disallowed only if: (1) an attacking player, either by his positioning or by contact, impairs the goalkeeper’s ability to move freely within his crease or defend his goal; or (2) an attacking player initiates intentional or deliberate contact with a goalkeeper, inside or outside of his goal crease. Incidental contact with a goalkeeper will be permitted, and resulting goals allowed, when such contact is initiated outside of the goal crease, provided the attacking player has made a reasonable effort to avoid such contact.

I guess incidental contact and he made a reasonable effort to avoid the contact? Come the fuck on. We’ve had goals called off for less interference than that. Bullshit.

 

[mostman]

Goals should be disallowed only if: (1) an attacking player, either by his positioning or by contact, impairs the goalkeeper’s ability to move freely within his crease or defend his goal; or (2) an attacking player initiates intentional or deliberate contact with a goalkeeper, inside or outside of his goal crease. Incidental contact with a goalkeeper will be permitted, and resulting goals allowed, when such contact is initiated outside of the goal crease, provided the attacking player has made a reasonable effort to avoid such contact.

I guess incidental contact and he made a reasonable effort to avoid the contact? Come the fuck on. We’ve had goals called off for less interference than that. Bullshit.

But they didn’t say that. They cited the first part in the explanation.

 

[scottyno]

Goals should be disallowed only if: (1) an attacking player, either by his positioning or by contact, impairs the goalkeeper’s ability to move freely within his crease or defend his goal; or (2) an attacking player initiates intentional or deliberate contact with a goalkeeper, inside or outside of his goal crease. Incidental contact with a goalkeeper will be permitted, and resulting goals allowed, when such contact is initiated outside of the goal crease, provided the attacking player has made a reasonable effort to avoid such contact.

I guess incidental contact and he made a reasonable effort to avoid the contact? Come the fuck on. We’ve had goals called off for less interference than that. Bullshit.

Pretty sure by that rule being inches outside the crease right in front of your goal should still fall under "or defend his goal"

 

[Curt S Loew]

I guess incidental contact and he made a reasonable effort to avoid the contact? Come the fuck on. We’ve had goals called off for less interference than that. Bullshit.

Except that wasn't the explanation.

 

[Jordu]

I looked it up.

I’m baffled.

 

[Cotillion]

But they didn’t say that. They cited the first part in the explanation.

Pretty sure by that rule being inches outside the crease right in front of your goal should still fall under "or defend his goal"

Except that wasn't the explanation.

Yeah. Not saying I agree but that’s the only part of the rule where they could conceivably rest their case.

I still think it’s a bullshit call considering Bruins goals taken off the board for goalie interference when our guy was getting checked into the goalie.

 

[OfTheCarmen]

Shame in the NESN crew for not putting the rule up on the screen and instructing the in air people how to properly discuss the play.

"Move freely in the crease or defend goal."

Those are not mutually exclusive.