shatterkneesinc
Banned
- 22,524
- 2,383
- Joined
- Nov 25, 2005
this is some bs
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: this_feature_currently_requires_accessing_site_using_safari
Can't believe I watched this robbery for 4hours man
Welp. Refs get the MVP for this one. Took away a goal and then don't call a clear penalty that leads to another. You can't tell me ****.
LOL rangers choked
They were up 4-2....
I'm wasted.
Ima go to Hollywood and get even more wasted.
2 more wins til another parade on Figeroua
Refs were absolutely atrocious, but not making an excuse. We should've won both of these games, we just keep losing the 3rd period. This series isnt over by any means.
My guy Zuc, and McDonagh have showed me something. Dudes are playing out of their minds.
I do think the refs could have easily called interference on King but I also think that there was a lot of contact made by McDonaugh pushing him into the goalie. The more I watched the replay the more 50/50 feel I got on the no-call. It's not like King initiated the contact with Henrik, King had a right to be in the crease too. Not a robbery by any means IMO.The missed interference was ridiculous, free goal just handed.
Nothing to be ashamed about losing two OT games on the road, just take care of business at home.
69.1 Interference on the Goalkeeper - This rule is based on the premise that an attacking player’s position, whether inside or outside the crease, should not, by itself, determine whether a goal should be allowed or disallowed. In other words, goals scored while attacking players are standing in the crease may, in appropriate circumstances be allowed. 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. The rule will be enforced exclusively in accordance with the on-ice judgment of the Referee(s), and not by means of video replay or review.I do think the refs could have easily called interference on King but I also think that there was a lot of contact made by McDonaugh pushing him into the goalie. The more I watched the replay the more 50/50 feel I got on the no-call. It's not like King initiated the contact with Henrik, King had a right to be in the crease too. Not a robbery by any means IMO.
Respect on not making any excuses. I still feel it was a 50/50 call so naturally I also understand if people, especially Ranger fans are frustrated.Henrik was still in the blue area. They called Interference on Pouliot the previous period that looked a lot less worse (it was still interference) than what happened on that particular play. Like I said, not making an excuse, we still shouldve won, but not doubt that non-call had a huge impact on the game.