This goal by the Nashville Predators was ruled a good goal originally, but was challenged by the Kings who felt Cody Glass interfered with goaltender David Rittich. After review the official announced there was incidental contact with the goaltender and the goal was taken off the board. Did they get it right? Was there interference conclusive enough to overturn the call? Have your say!
@Winnipeg Jets
14 Comments
It looks like he got a piece of Rittich’s glove, but most of the contact was with his own defenseman’s stick. It’s 50/50 enough that we never what we’re going to get from the NHL.
good call
It’s interference. It’s tight but Glass skate in the crease impeding the goalie. His stick draped over impeding the goalie. He does get Glass out of the crease somewhat but for me it’s enough for goalie interference even if it’s a little bit soft
he was outside the blue, that's not inference, can we get some officials that actually know the rules, it's getting ridiculous.
In close calls, I think all calls should be given in favour of the goalie.
Players should be concerned about coming into contact with the goalie or being in the crease.
Isn’t it enough that a goalie needs to stand still in front of a frozen puck many times a game, he shouldn’t have to contend with physical contact as well. There’s no physical contact in this one and I’d rather see it stay that way.
It’s just a sport and players should be able to live healthy lives after they retire. Just like any other job.
Yeah, it's definately interference.
he was in the crease anyway and made contact with the goalie… good call
Not interference. This is an easy one. The defensive player has his arm around him holding him. So this should be a delayed penalty call. There is a hook in there too. As he is being held in position by the defensive player, where he is located in relation to the goalie is entirely at fault of the defenseman. If he wasn't being held there, I could see it being a harder decision. You cannot get a goal waved off by shoving an offensive player into your own goalie.
The top view says it all. Defense forced him into the crease, and then goalie pushes his stick away with open glove. His stick never really goes into the crease. How does nobody see this!!!!!!. No goalie interference. GOOD GOAL.😊
Putting his stick in the goalies glove is fucking with the goalie in a way that shouldn't be allowed, so I'd say interference.
Correct call.
Goaltender interference is the stain in the NHL Rulebook. It is completely subjective. The standard changes repeatedly:
– What is the score?
– What team is the "interference" against?
– Who is the perpetrator of the "interference?"
– Is the game a national broadcast in Prime Time?
– Did the goalie initiate the contact?
If any rule needs a complete overhaul, it's this one.
No goal
Not interference. Mostly outside the crease and five hole. Glove had nothing to do with it.