Sergei Gonchar takes a slapshot...the puck appears to either hit the post then cross bar, or the post then the bar in the back of the net...then bounce away from the Toronto goal.
The insuing pass and then chase for the puck results in Alexei Ponikarovsky heading toward the Penguin goal with a breakaway. At the last second, Gonchar gives Poni a hook.
Fleury stops the puck...the ref motions for a penalty shot.
The play is reviewed and sure enough, Gonchar's shot was IN (and then quickly out of) the net.
The clock is WOUND BACK to the time of the Gonchar goal and the Pengiuns lead 2-1.
Wait...Gonchar is IN THE PENALTY BOX?
Under what circumstances, can a penalty be called on Gonchar, if the penalty is a direct result of a breakaway, that by the rolling back of the clock, NEVER occured in the first place?
I can understand a scenario where a penalty would be called...say two guys break out into a fight...or someone gets injured because of a hit (maybe)...but in this case...with the infraction occuring as a direct result of the goal that WAS NOT called correctly, how can a penalty be given to Gonchar?
It makes no sense to me.
what happens if a Goalie is wearing black pads.. the puck clearly goes into the net along with the goalie and then you can see the goalie shove the puck outta the net and even the team being scored on say its a goal?? NOTHING it's called a No goal by the war roomIt makes no sense to me..
sorry the team being scored on announcers say its a goal*
yeah...that's a good one too...
I think there may have been a hold on a feed for one of those review angles...if not, then they really screwed up that one...
I'm a Leaf fan and I agree, the penalty made no sense. With the discovery of Gonchar's goal, and the clock being wound back, the hook on Ponikarovski should have been moot.
the war room basically needs new employees..and we need new refs and a new commissioner . lately watching games it amazes me how many blatant calls they miss or F up.. its like 10x worse then last year
see the problem with stuff like that.. penalties aren't as big of a deal.. but what happens if it takes like 5 minutes for stoppage (taking out all advantages a team may of gotten) and one of the teams scores again.. does that goal not count? do you wind the clock back 5 minutes?what if the pens had scored in the next couple minutes.. they deserve 2 goals then IMO.. you cant take away an earned goal just because you got a call wrong a few minutes prior.. same goes for penalties IMO
Personally, I think if there is a question of whether or not the puck was in, the referee should have the ability to stop the game for a review. I know this could be problematic...but it eliminates the long delay when there isn't a natural stoppage.
And concerning this specific case, there has to be a way to write the rules such that if a penalty occurs as a direct result of the scoring chance/shot on goal, that was in fact in the net, then there is no penalty...either way. Again...would need to be thought out...but they could do it.
One last comment on the Flyers NO GOAL fiasco the other night. There is no way they could have seen the view that was shown AFTER the review...if they did see it during the review, how could it not have been a goal? And if they didn't see it during the review...WHY NOT?
FSN Pittsburgh held back the definitive replay angle from the war room.http://www.philly.com/philly/sports/flyers/20100112_NHL_investigating_withholding_of_tape_of_Flyer_s_goal.html
Yeah...heard/read about it today. I dislike the Flyers in the good natured way that you should dislike a cross state rival...BUT holding back the video is just plain wrong. I am embarrassed by that.