Jump to content

Photo

Goalie interference threatens to ruin playoffs


  • Please log in to reply
27 replies to this topic

#1 njdss4

njdss4

    Senior Devil

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 709 posts

Posted 21 April 2008 - 03:23 PM

Clicky

I'm glad someone else thinks that running goalies isn't the way to go. I'm all for screening goalies, but not making them fear injury due to some idiot ramming them at full speed.
  • 0
Posted Image<--- Thanks RunninWithTheDevil!
REALISTS ARE NOT PESSIMISTS
"If that's a penalty, we should just stop playing hockey." EJ Hradek on a bad penalty call against Langs
"I still keep in touch with Jay and Gio, but Marty won't even speak to me!" - $cott Gomez
^ Marty is just like Devils fans, HE CAN'T STAND TRAITORS AND THE RANGERS EITHER!
Posted Image of the Kansas City Scouts and Colorado Rockies

#2 SatansDevils

SatansDevils

    OOT Scoreboard Specialist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,006 posts

Posted 21 April 2008 - 03:33 PM

The NHL needs to protect the goalie a little bit better than they are doing now especially with Brodeur getting run over in almost every game this season and especially the playoffs. The NHL needs the "Brodeur" rule now where a goaltender should not be run into or it will be a 2-minute penalty. The NHL needs to enforce the goaltending interference rule/penalty a lot more next season or there will be hurt goalies from this.
  • 0

brodeurcups.png682 WINS, 124 SHUTOUTSgallery_1080_56_3521.png Keeper of #9-Zach Parise, Brodeur's All-Time Wins/Shutout Record (552+, 104+) FIRE & ICE Lounges @ Prudential Center.
5,580 fans for Devils/Flyers Blizzard game on 2/10/10, RD Avatar Award Winner: '08-'09 for best Avatar


#3 Devils731

Devils731

    A Legend

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 17,497 posts

Posted 21 April 2008 - 04:26 PM

Perhaps an idea would be to make goalie interference a penalty with severity levels. You have the unintentional contact which is no penalty but can disallow goals like we currently have. You have contact where the player did not due enough to avoid the goalie and faces a 2 minute minor. You have a 4 minute minor where it appears the player made a decision not to avoid the goalie and puts the goalie body at harm. This would never happen though because the NHL refs do not like having discretion, they like black and white rules like the stupid stick breaking is a 2 minute slashing minor.
  • 0
Your unconditional rejection of violence makes you smugly think of yourselves as noble, as enlightened, but in reality it is nothing less than abject moral capitulation to evil. Unconditional rejection of self-defense, because you think its a supposed surrender to violence, leaves you no resort but begging for mercy or offering appeasement.

-Terry Goodkind


Sex Panther cologne -- 50 percent of the time, it works every time.

-Anchorman

The best time to plant a tree is 20 years ago. The second best time is now.

-Anonymous

Keeper of Section 212-213's wayward step

#4 Jake

Jake

    Albany Devil

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 204 posts

Posted 21 April 2008 - 05:06 PM

I think a 4 minute minor is a little much for an interference call. Personally, I think they should call it every time it can be avoided and isn't. Like when Jagr drove the net and took of Marty's helmet. Superficially at least, the point of the play was not to hurt him. But could it have been avoided? Absolutely.
  • 0
Mooseknuckles Hockey For Life.

#5 Devils731

Devils731

    A Legend

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 17,497 posts

Posted 21 April 2008 - 05:19 PM

I think a 4 minute minor is a little much for an interference call. Personally, I think they should call it every time it can be avoided and isn't. Like when Jagr drove the net and took of Marty's helmet. Superficially at least, the point of the play was not to hurt him. But could it have been avoided? Absolutely.


Ya, I was saying that would still be a 2 minute minor. 4 minutes would be the play where a player is putting the goalie in serious danger through reckless play.
  • 0
Your unconditional rejection of violence makes you smugly think of yourselves as noble, as enlightened, but in reality it is nothing less than abject moral capitulation to evil. Unconditional rejection of self-defense, because you think its a supposed surrender to violence, leaves you no resort but begging for mercy or offering appeasement.

-Terry Goodkind


Sex Panther cologne -- 50 percent of the time, it works every time.

-Anchorman

The best time to plant a tree is 20 years ago. The second best time is now.

-Anonymous

Keeper of Section 212-213's wayward step

#6 StarDew

StarDew

    General Manager

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,725 posts

Posted 21 April 2008 - 05:54 PM

It could be progressive kind of like high sticking...2 or 4 or a major...I really miss 70's - 80's hockey...this wouldn't even be an issue...players would have taken care of the problem pronto :)
  • 0
Dew
So long and thanks for all the fish.
TIMEX RULES!!

"When we were struggling at the beginning of the year we were wondering what was wrong and trying to find reasons. At the end of the day, all we had to do was look in the mirror and the answers were right there." -- Sergei Brylin 12/2/2007

#7 brodeurrocks

brodeurrocks

    General Manager

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,230 posts

Posted 21 April 2008 - 06:06 PM

It could be progressive kind of like high sticking...2 or 4 or a major...I really miss 70's - 80's hockey...this wouldn't even be an issue...players would have taken care of the problem pronto :)

Exactly. Once upon a time, these matters had a way of sorting them selves out, so to speak. You didn't have idiots like Avery running around pulling his stunts.
  • 0

Posted Image

Official Keeper of David Clarkson's Open Ice Hits!


Official Keeper of the stains on Chico's shirt and tie from "Chico Eats" episodes!


#8 njdss4

njdss4

    Senior Devil

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 709 posts

Posted 21 April 2008 - 06:26 PM

It could be progressive kind of like high sticking...2 or 4 or a major...I really miss 70's - 80's hockey...this wouldn't even be an issue...players would have taken care of the problem pronto :)

The Golden Age of hockey. Long gone.
  • 0
Posted Image<--- Thanks RunninWithTheDevil!
REALISTS ARE NOT PESSIMISTS
"If that's a penalty, we should just stop playing hockey." EJ Hradek on a bad penalty call against Langs
"I still keep in touch with Jay and Gio, but Marty won't even speak to me!" - $cott Gomez
^ Marty is just like Devils fans, HE CAN'T STAND TRAITORS AND THE RANGERS EITHER!
Posted Image of the Kansas City Scouts and Colorado Rockies

#9 David Puddy

David Puddy

    Hall of Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,314 posts

Posted 21 April 2008 - 06:27 PM

This would never happen though because the NHL refs do not like having discretion, they like black and white rules like the stupid stick breaking is a 2 minute slashing minor.


Umm, it's the fans and NHL brass that don't like giving refs discretion.
  • 0
Posted Image

#10 Devils731

Devils731

    A Legend

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 17,497 posts

Posted 21 April 2008 - 06:39 PM

Umm, it's the fans and NHL brass that don't like giving refs discretion.


No way, the refs hate discretion. Discretion gets them yelled at so they much prefer black and white rules over rules that make sense. For example, the flipping the puck out of play rule was originally up to the refs discretion whether the player did it on purpose to avoid the other teams offense. It rapidly changed to any time a player flips the puck out of play in the defensive zone only because the refs didn't want to have ot make a judgement call on every puck going out of play. The refs are like people with other jobs, the more black and white the rules are the more they are CYAing themselves.
  • 0
Your unconditional rejection of violence makes you smugly think of yourselves as noble, as enlightened, but in reality it is nothing less than abject moral capitulation to evil. Unconditional rejection of self-defense, because you think its a supposed surrender to violence, leaves you no resort but begging for mercy or offering appeasement.

-Terry Goodkind


Sex Panther cologne -- 50 percent of the time, it works every time.

-Anchorman

The best time to plant a tree is 20 years ago. The second best time is now.

-Anonymous

Keeper of Section 212-213's wayward step

#11 sundstrom

sundstrom

    Hall of Famer

  • Mod
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,294 posts

Posted 21 April 2008 - 08:19 PM

i think the best way to protect the goaltenders is to create a rule that says that a player can't score if he's in the crease. that way, forwards will have to steer clear and really won't be able to touch the goalies. i bet if the devils and rangers played again, this would really be in the devils favor.


for those of you that can't see that i'm channeling 96-97, my point is that the rule is fine as it is as long as refs use their fvcking heads and their fvcking eyes. falling on a guy when there's no one near you - penalty. running a goaltender w/o the puck - penalty.

flopping like brodeur did when jagr hit his helmet - penalty on marty.

you'd think its easy to call these games, but its obviously much different when you're down there on the ice.
  • 0

"This team was never the same once we lost Patrik Sundstrom"- Lou Lamoriello


20082719943.png
_________________________________________________________________
“They’re the ones that makes it happen,” Lemaire said. “It’s not us. It’s not me. It’s not the other guy. It’s not the guy before. It’s not the guy after. It’s them. And they have to take care of business.”
-
"I guess I just miss my friend" (#28)


#12 DevilNurn

DevilNurn

    Head Coach

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,130 posts

Posted 21 April 2008 - 09:04 PM

I just don't want a "foot-in-the-crease" rule...I'm just not sure what they can do.
  • 0

#13 oconnellrules

oconnellrules

    Rookie Devil

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 430 posts

Posted 22 April 2008 - 02:43 AM

Lets be honest here folks. Marty played subpar hockey vs. the Rangers. He was way out of the net and out of position and let in a lot of soft goals. Most notably to Marc Staal and completely let him off the hook for his Madden OT GWG gaffe.
  • 0

cmon marty

#3 #4 #27 #30 #26


#14 IceThief

IceThief

    Senior Devil

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 770 posts

Posted 22 April 2008 - 01:13 PM

I just don't want a "foot-in-the-crease" rule...I'm just not sure what they can do.



Basically, they can't do a freaking thing about it.

The NHL was forever changed the day that Brett Hull was allowed to score a Stanley Cup winning goal standing IN DOM HASEK'S CREASE and all Osama Bin Laden and the Mullah Omar did was change the rule book to make it legal.

The NHL was forever changed the day that John Leclair was allowed to score a goal THROUGH THE SIDE of Buffalo's goal in the playoffs. Not the legal way through the front, over the goal line, and between the pipes, THROUGH THE SIDE OF BUFFALO'S GOAL.

Goalies are now fair game in their own creases or out of them.

THIS my friends is the NEW NHL brought to you by the Iraqi Information Minister.

:dance:
  • 0
In honor of one of the greatest dmen to ever play the game, I remain to this day and forever after a lifetime member of the Scott Stevens Fan Club:

"If you ever had to describe what a Devil player would be," said Devils general manager Lou Lamoriello, "the name would be Scott Stevens."

"He was just huge," Devils left wing Patrik Elias said of walking into training camp the first time in 1995. "I was afraid of him. You had a 170-pound guy coming here and he was 220, 225 with these paws like a bear. I was pretty intimidated the first few years. I'm happy he was on my side the whole time."

#15 Deek_1969

Deek_1969

    Rookie Devil

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 328 posts

Posted 23 April 2008 - 12:18 AM

Umm, it's the fans and NHL brass that don't like giving refs discretion.


Just my own opinion....but Ref discretion is a joke! I know I am bias, but it seems like the Devils get screwed
more often than not. I like the Delay of Game automatic minor. That's the easiest penalty to call and it goes both ways.
  • 0
[size=5][color=#FF0000]The strong take from the weak and the smart take from the strong.

#16 Deek_1969

Deek_1969

    Rookie Devil

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 328 posts

Posted 23 April 2008 - 12:26 AM

Lets be honest here folks. Marty played subpar hockey vs. the Rangers. He was way out of the net and out of position and let in a lot of soft goals. Most notably to Marc Staal and completely let him off the hook for his Madden OT GWG gaffe.


I counted a couple of soft goals, but for the most part his D left him high and dry. Poor passing, turn overs and not clearing the front of the net will kill a GAA.
  • 0
[size=5][color=#FF0000]The strong take from the weak and the smart take from the strong.

#17 Masked Fan

Masked Fan

    Hall of Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,100 posts

Posted 23 April 2008 - 02:44 AM

Speaking of Goalie interference. Anyone see Huet laying in the trapezoid crying while the Flyhers scored their 2nd in their decisive game 7?

WOW WOW WOW!! He was in the crease and got RUN OVER and knocked 4 feet out of the crease while the Flyhers put there 2nd goal into the abandoned net.

WOW! Guess the puck was there, and the Flyher used a D-man as padding for the collision, so it wasn't a penalty. :D

Edited by Masked Fan, 23 April 2008 - 02:45 AM.

  • 0

Over? Did you say "over"? Nothing is over until we decide it is!
Posted Image
Was it over when the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor? Hell no!


Posted Image
2009 Chico


#18 SatansDevils

SatansDevils

    OOT Scoreboard Specialist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,006 posts

Posted 23 April 2008 - 04:43 AM

Speaking of Goalie interference. Anyone see Huet laying in the trapezoid crying while the Flyhers scored their 2nd in their decisive game 7?

WOW WOW WOW!! He was in the crease and got RUN OVER and knocked 4 feet out of the crease while the Flyhers put there 2nd goal into the abandoned net.

WOW! Guess the puck was there, and the Flyher used a D-man as padding for the collision, so it wasn't a penalty. :D



Yeah it costed the Capitals Game 7 and a trip to Round 2. Devorski should be castrated by making no interference call. It was a bad non call and it costed the Capitals the game. It should have been 2-1 Capitals win in regulation. :angry:
  • 0

brodeurcups.png682 WINS, 124 SHUTOUTSgallery_1080_56_3521.png Keeper of #9-Zach Parise, Brodeur's All-Time Wins/Shutout Record (552+, 104+) FIRE & ICE Lounges @ Prudential Center.
5,580 fans for Devils/Flyers Blizzard game on 2/10/10, RD Avatar Award Winner: '08-'09 for best Avatar


#19 mddevsfan

mddevsfan

    All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,807 posts

Posted 23 April 2008 - 06:38 AM

Speaking of Goalie interference. Anyone see Huet laying in the trapezoid crying while the Flyhers scored their 2nd in their decisive game 7?

WOW WOW WOW!! He was in the crease and got RUN OVER and knocked 4 feet out of the crease while the Flyhers put there 2nd goal into the abandoned net.

WOW! Guess the puck was there, and the Flyher used a D-man as padding for the collision, so it wasn't a penalty. :D

That was awful. I would think that at the very least, they would have waived off the goal.
  • 0
"The Devils always find a way to win. That will continue." - Scott Stevens

#20 ZuljinRaynor

ZuljinRaynor

    Prospect

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 147 posts

Posted 23 April 2008 - 01:26 PM

Yeah it costed the Capitals Game 7 and a trip to Round 2. Devorski should be castrated by making no interference call. It was a bad non call and it costed the Capitals the game. It should have been 2-1 Capitals win in regulation. :angry:

Indeed. I think that was probably the worst call I've seen in this whole first round. I forget which game it was but Kozlov got pushed into Biron and they called it a penalty there. Here the Caps got screwed again.
  • 0




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users