I feel like what's missing here is a discussion of how long before the next shot is necessary (after the contact occurred) for it to not be interference. My colloquial understanding is 'long enough for the goalie to reset', which is arguably variable depending on the extent of contact. In this case I think it's borderline that the goalie had time to reset for the next play – the contact is disruptive, but not onerously so. I'd probably still call it interference, but I don't think it's cut and dried
I agree no goal. He is going back into him anyways if he doesnt push him away prematurely. and the goalie is in the crease . That isnt incidental anyways. EDIT he also hits him in the crease in the begining.
Makes sense to me that this is called off , but it seems to me a lot weaker than goals that counted last year where the argument was made that the goalie "had time to reset". If they call it consistently like this going forward I think it's a step in the right direction especially as there's no defenseman in front that Palmieri us battling with.
But is it his skates that need to be in the blue or just his body with his skates outside the paint is enough to be considered “outside the crease”? Not arguing just curious, it seems that his skates were outside the crease the entire time
5 Comments
I feel like what's missing here is a discussion of how long before the next shot is necessary (after the contact occurred) for it to not be interference. My colloquial understanding is 'long enough for the goalie to reset', which is arguably variable depending on the extent of contact. In this case I think it's borderline that the goalie had time to reset for the next play – the contact is disruptive, but not onerously so. I'd probably still call it interference, but I don't think it's cut and dried
He and the francophones spell it weird, but it's all in the coach's name:
WAHHHHHHHH!😭
I agree no goal. He is going back into him anyways if he doesnt push him away prematurely. and the goalie is in the crease . That isnt incidental anyways. EDIT he also hits him in the crease in the begining.
Makes sense to me that this is called off , but it seems to me a lot weaker than goals that counted last year where the argument was made that the goalie "had time to reset". If they call it consistently like this going forward I think it's a step in the right direction especially as there's no defenseman in front that Palmieri us battling with.
But is it his skates that need to be in the blue or just his body with his skates outside the paint is enough to be considered “outside the crease”? Not arguing just curious, it seems that his skates were outside the crease the entire time