![]() While that does take some hard-fought goals away from teams, it minimizes the chaos and confusion surrounding the decisions made. This means that any review made will follow that standard, and there are far fewer deviations from the written rule. The IIHF rulebook goes far beyond the NHL’s by providing a table (Appendix 4, Table 16, Rule 69) in the annexes that describe every situation, and if the goal is allowed, disallowed, penalized, non-penalized, where the faceoff is placed, and more. Such as the subjectiveness in the call by the international officials is minimized. ![]() That standard seems very similar to the NHL’s however, there are some distinct differences. The IIHF goaltender interference rule essentially boils down to “touching the goalie in the crease is goalie interference”. It is time for the NHL to take a page out of the IIHF rulebook and take out the massive loopholes allowing for subjective calls to remain the norm. While controversy will always surround goalie interference calls due to the nature that they will impact a goal being scored or not, there are examples available of a standard that is very clear in its application. So how is it that one goal where a player had obvious contact in the blue paint resulting in a goaltender’s inability to move freely in his crease is allowed, while another, where the attacking player had left the crease after the contact in the blue paint before the shot being attempted was disallowed? If contact in the blue paint isn’t allowed, shouldn’t that be universally applied, especially when the NHL uses the most up-to-date video technology with a staff of dozens to review these plays and a rule book that states a ruling in clear language? The IIHF Leads the Way Even with the added technology and staff in Toronto able to pour over a play from dozens of angles, it has still been difficult for the league to standardize the judgments on goaltender interference especially when the decisions are made by a different person every game. The rule now has evolved into the current Rule 69, Goaltender Interference. While the onus on the skater to avoid contact with the goalie remained, there were no mitigating circumstances added, such as the defender causing the attacking player to be unable to avoid contact. It was anything by an attacking player casing a goalie to be stopped, forced to change their path, or even slowed down in the crease that was an automatic call.Īs technology improved, the rule evolved. A penalty was assessed if an attacking skater made contact with a goalie in his crease when the goalie was attempting to get in position to attempt a save. When the rule was introduced, things were simple. It's a goal #gohabsgo /vlFCw6BTwq- Blain Potvin □ January 20, 2023 What is it? How is it supposed to be applied? Most of all, is it time for it to change, especially when a coin flip is considered more accurate than the NHL’s Situation Room? For something that has a codified written ruling, there seems to be a lot of confusion surrounding it. There are so many questions surrounding this one rule. Does Anyone Know What Goalie Interference is? With fans having legitimate trust issues with NHL officials after the Tim Peel “makeup call” incident – and the incorporation of gambling into the NHL – now more than ever, it is time for the NHL to take some of the grey out of these calls and make more objective and predictable results, especially as the league begins to brand itself with sports betting sites. Goaltender interference calls and reviews have a much larger impact on the game and its outcome. This isn’t a puck over the glass, a hook, or a trip. It is important to get this call correct as close to 100 percent of the time as possible. ![]() ![]() Explore everything hockey with THW’s Hockeypedia pages. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |