HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Metropolitan Division > New York Rangers
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

Former Ref Kerry Fraser Rules against On-Ice Call (Gaborik/Brodeur)

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
02-09-2012, 09:22 AM
  #1
KreiMeARiver*
Have Confidence
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: UES
Posts: 6,621
vCash: 500
Former Ref Kerry Fraser Rules against On-Ice Call (Gaborik/Brodeur)

http://tsn.ca/nhl/story/?id=387268

So, here it is...we were officially robbed of AT LEAST 1 point.

Gaborik and Goalie Interference

Doug and Mike:

No matter who you are cheering for, this missed call had a major impact on the game and reinforces my call for video review by the referee on contact with the goalkeeper where a goal results. (Notice I said by the referee, not the situation room!)

I have maintained this position ever since I attended a Leafs-Panthers game (Oct. 2010) in the ACC. Late in that game with the score tied, Colton Orr came out of the corner and ran over the Panthers goalkeeper as the shot came from the point. All officiating eyes were focused on the puck at that point in time.

To add insult to injury, the puck hit Orr's skate as he sprawled over the goalkeeper and was given credit for the game-winning goal. The end result to this play was the recommendation by Florida GM Dale Tallon to institute a coach's appeal.

If a "coach's appeal" is too radical, let's make contact with the goalie a reviewable situation; at least where a goal results or is being waved off. I can tell you firsthand just how difficult it is, in real time and with traffic going to the net, to determine intent (deliberate or incidental) or if any action by a defending player caused the contact to result on the goalkeeper. If the referee happens to be on the opposite side to where contact was initiated (as referee Dan O'Rouke was in this case), it is often next to impossible to get an accurate read on the play.

That is exactly what happened last night in Madison Square Garden in the dying seconds of the game with the Devils leading 1-0. As the Rangers attacked the net, Marian Gaborik attempted a full blown stop with snow flying in front of Martin Brodeur.

Initially, it might appear that Gaborik just ran out of real estate and crashed into Brodeur, which would result in a goalie interference penalty. From referee O'Rourke's position, a little bit behind the goal line on the near side to Gaborik, that is exactly how it would appear to the ref in real time.

As I saw the reverse look of the play, I noticed Gaborik's left skate break from his natural stopping motion and slide marginally to the left, causing an unnatural fall into Brodeur with Anton Volchenkov exerting backdoor pressure on Gaborik from the opposite side.

Upon closer inspection, we see that Volchenkov places his stick between the legs of Gaborik and the pressure exerted causes the NY Ranger to fall and crash into Brodeur. The clear evidence is seen when the players attempt to untangle themselves in the crease. Vochenkov's stick blade can be found stuck in the plastic blade holder of Gaborik's left skate!

If anyone didn't think the contact from the back side was significant to put Gaborik into Brodeur, Volchenkov's stick placement should provide the smoking gun!

What does all this mean? The Rangers certainly lost at least one point last night. Beyond that, it should highlight for you what I have known for years, ever since we had to deal with the ridiculous toe-in-the-crease standard that was rewritten into Rule 69 - Interference on the Goalkeeper. The refs need help with this call.

KreiMeARiver* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-09-2012, 09:26 AM
  #2
Bleed Ranger Blue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 16,051
vCash: 500
How nice of Fraser to write a long-winded piece about the play 2 days after it happened. The ref's working the game had about less than a second to make a decision.

Hope the team gets over it quicker than the fans. It was a borderline play thats been called in favor of the goaltenders since I can remember.

Bleed Ranger Blue is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-09-2012, 09:28 AM
  #3
CH2
Registered User
 
CH2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: NYC
Posts: 1,361
vCash: 500
The call was unfortunate but I can understand why it was called that way. I just hope the Rangers goalies get the same call when there is contact. Lundqvist certainly hasn't gotten those calls historically

CH2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-09-2012, 09:29 AM
  #4
WhipNash27
Quattro!!
 
WhipNash27's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Westchester, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 16,363
vCash: 500
Fraser is 100% right. The point is that the Refs can't always be put at fault for these situations. From their vantage point in real-time they can't always get a clear view of what's happening. They should have the ability to review the play and come to a more clear decision. Unfortunately, the NHL doesn't make that tool available to them and that needs to change.

WhipNash27 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-09-2012, 09:30 AM
  #5
turcotte8
Registered User
 
turcotte8's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: NY
Country: United States
Posts: 1,881
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bleed Ranger Blue View Post
The ref's working the game had about less than a second to make a decision.
Which is why he's making the point that the play should be reviewable.

turcotte8 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-09-2012, 09:34 AM
  #6
Rangers Fail
free james sheppard
 
Rangers Fail's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: NY
Country: United States
Posts: 24,417
vCash: 500
Good to know the Debs were given a free win, and Marty a free shutout. **** the refs. Those idiots deserved to have the entire Garden throw beer at them, not just the select few.

Rangers Fail is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-09-2012, 09:42 AM
  #7
Krampus
Call me Nils
 
Krampus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: NYC
Country: Austria
Posts: 19,340
vCash: 420
Quote:
Originally Posted by Henriks Broadway Hat View Post
Good to know the Debs were given a free win, and Marty a free shutout. **** the refs. Those idiots deserved to have the entire Garden throw beer at them, not just the select few.
It's not the refs' faults. From their position, it looked like the right call, and I'm sure they would have reviewed it if they were allowed to. Whoever came up with the stupid rule of the inability to review this should have a bullet thrown at the... From a gun

Krampus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-09-2012, 09:47 AM
  #8
Megustaelhockey
Global Moderator
Hybrid icing
 
Megustaelhockey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 8,186
vCash: 500
The hair has spoken.

I miss refs like him with personality.

Megustaelhockey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-09-2012, 09:49 AM
  #9
Bleed Ranger Blue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 16,051
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by turcotte8 View Post
Which is why he's making the point that the play should be reviewable.
Whats next? Review every penalty to see if the ref got it right? I dont want the game micro-managed to that level.

Bleed Ranger Blue is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-09-2012, 09:50 AM
  #10
Rangers Fail
free james sheppard
 
Rangers Fail's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: NY
Country: United States
Posts: 24,417
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bleed Ranger Blue View Post
Whats next? Review every penalty to see if the ref got it right? I dont want the game micro-managed to that level.
Review goalie interference penalties that result in goals. Buffalo/Boston yesterday is a great example.

Rangers Fail is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-09-2012, 09:53 AM
  #11
JoeRangers
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Staten Island, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 389
vCash: 500
Do you really want them to have the ability to review every borderline penalty? Where does it end?

JoeRangers is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-09-2012, 09:54 AM
  #12
Greg02
Registered User
 
Greg02's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 1,958
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JoeRangers View Post
Do you really want them to have the ability to review every borderline penalty? Where does it end?
Plays that directly result in a goal.

Slippery slope fallacy.

Greg02 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-09-2012, 09:56 AM
  #13
Tawnos
A guy with a bass
 
Tawnos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Charlotte, NC
Country: United States
Posts: 13,472
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bleed Ranger Blue View Post
How nice of Fraser to write a long-winded piece about the play 2 days after it happened. The ref's working the game had about less than a second to make a decision.
That article was up yesterday early afternoon.

I wouldn't mind if they made that type of play reviewable, but I don't know that it would've been overturned.

I read at least one pundit saying it was the right call (LeBrun I think?).

Tawnos is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-09-2012, 09:57 AM
  #14
Gardner McKay
Moderator
Cupcake schedule.
 
Gardner McKay's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: SoutheastOfDisorder
Country: United States
Posts: 12,118
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bleed Ranger Blue View Post
Whats next? Review every penalty to see if the ref got it right? I dont want the game micro-managed to that level.
Every other possible play that can result in a no goal is reviewable. This should be as well. Whether the play results in a penalty or not should ONLY be reviewed if the continuation of the play results in a goal. No micro-managing, just getting the game right.

These plays happen often enough for it to be a problem that needs to be fixed, but not often enough that it will cause a problem with the on ice product.

Gardner McKay is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-09-2012, 09:58 AM
  #15
Gardner McKay
Moderator
Cupcake schedule.
 
Gardner McKay's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: SoutheastOfDisorder
Country: United States
Posts: 12,118
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tawnos View Post
That article was up yesterday early afternoon.

I wouldn't mind if they made that type of play reviewable, but I don't know that it would've been overturned.

I read at least one pundit saying it was the right call (LeBrun I think?).
Lebrun IMO is also one of the biggest toolbags in hockey. I trust the opinion of a NHL referee with 31 years of experience versus a guy who probably has not been in a pair of hockey skates in years.

Gardner McKay is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-09-2012, 09:59 AM
  #16
WhipNash27
Quattro!!
 
WhipNash27's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Westchester, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 16,363
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bleed Ranger Blue View Post
Whats next? Review every penalty to see if the ref got it right? I dont want the game micro-managed to that level.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JoeRangers View Post
Do you really want them to have the ability to review every borderline penalty? Where does it end?
There's a difference between a "borderline penalty" that occurred as a goal is being scored compared to any other penalty. Hockey was the first professional sport to pioneer the use of instant replay. It's nonsense to say that adding a review for this one instance (which only makes up a small fraction of goals) would be too much.

This isn't the in the crease rule from the 90s.

WhipNash27 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-09-2012, 09:59 AM
  #17
Rangers Fail
free james sheppard
 
Rangers Fail's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: NY
Country: United States
Posts: 24,417
vCash: 500
Each game is alloted 2.5 hours, although they usually give 3 in the playoffs. 2 minutes to review a play like this is really not going to change much.

Rangers Fail is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-09-2012, 10:00 AM
  #18
NYRFAN218
Mac Truck
 
NYRFAN218's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Brooklyn, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 12,691
vCash: 500
As BRB said, I don't want the game micro managed to the point where we're reviewing everything. The problem with expanding review is the quality of the officiating declines since they know they have review to ensure the right call will be made. Just look at the NFL and some of the ****** calls officials make now. Why get the call right when the coach could just challenge it and fix it then?

NYRFAN218 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-09-2012, 10:03 AM
  #19
WhipNash27
Quattro!!
 
WhipNash27's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Westchester, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 16,363
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NYRFAN218 View Post
As BRB said, I don't want the game micro managed to the point where we're reviewing everything. The problem with expanding review is the quality of the officiating declines since they know they have review to ensure the right call will be made. Just look at the NFL and some of the ****** calls officials make now. Why get the call right when the coach could just challenge it and fix it then?
I still don't understand how adding a review for goaltender interference on scored goals is micromanaging any more than we currently have? We have reviews for kicked in goals and goals scored with a high stick. How is this any different?

WhipNash27 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-09-2012, 10:03 AM
  #20
NYRFAN218
Mac Truck
 
NYRFAN218's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Brooklyn, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 12,691
vCash: 500
The other issue here is the ref had his arm up for a penalty before the puck was even shot into the net. The play isn't reviewable because the play was dead as soon as the puck was shot in.

NYRFAN218 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-09-2012, 10:03 AM
  #21
Stugots
Kolo, Kolo Kolo!
 
Stugots's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Long Island
Country: United States
Posts: 6,434
vCash: 500
Review controversial scoring plays- like the NFL does- INCLUDING goalie interference.

Stugots is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-09-2012, 10:06 AM
  #22
Gardner McKay
Moderator
Cupcake schedule.
 
Gardner McKay's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: SoutheastOfDisorder
Country: United States
Posts: 12,118
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by NYRFAN218 View Post
The other issue here is the ref had his arm up for a penalty before the puck was even shot into the net. The play isn't reviewable because the play was dead as soon as the puck was shot in.
I dont think that is correct...

Gardner McKay is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-09-2012, 10:12 AM
  #23
Gardner McKay
Moderator
Cupcake schedule.
 
Gardner McKay's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: SoutheastOfDisorder
Country: United States
Posts: 12,118
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by NYRFAN218 View Post
As BRB said, I don't want the game micro managed to the point where we're reviewing everything. The problem with expanding review is the quality of the officiating declines since they know they have review to ensure the right call will be made. Just look at the NFL and some of the ****** calls officials make now. Why get the call right when the coach could just challenge it and fix it then?
No one is arguing for reviewing everything. Just everything relating to a goal. I can't see how anything is wrong with that. Every other goal related issue is reviewable.

If a puck that is batted down into the net is deemed to be a high stick by the official and resulting in a non goal, that is reviewable.

Why can't the same apply to the interference? Penalty or not the wrong call is being made and therefore because it is related to a goal it should be a REVIEWABLE call.

People worrying about micro managing are worrying way to much. Until they start making penalties not related to a goal reviewable you have nothing to worry about.

Gardner McKay is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-09-2012, 10:14 AM
  #24
Bleed Ranger Blue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 16,051
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DubiSnacks17 View Post
I still don't understand how adding a review for goaltender interference on scored goals is micromanaging any more than we currently have? We have reviews for kicked in goals and goals scored with a high stick. How is this any different?
When you review that play, its still open to all kinds of interpretation. Much more so than a kick or a high stick.

Bleed Ranger Blue is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-09-2012, 10:16 AM
  #25
HBK27
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Northern NJ
Posts: 3,550
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Henriks Broadway Hat View Post
Good to know the Debs were given a free win, and Marty a free shutout. **** the refs. Those idiots deserved to have the entire Garden throw beer at them, not just the select few.
This was a highly debatable call that could’ve gone either way – even after seeing a replay several times with the benefit of slow motion, experts are still split on whether or not the correct call was made. The ref was in great position to make the call and had a split second to do so – it was as judgment call, not an obvious miss or blown call that he should be getting crucified for.

Gaborik began to stop and then had contact with Volchenkov – from there, it’s tough/nearly impossible to determine how much of the force of Volchenkov propelled Gaborik into Brodeur vs. Gaborik feeling the pressure and easing up a bit on his effort to try to avoid Marty. Given the situation (down by a goal with just seconds left), Gaborik might have been more apt to make contact with Marty than he would’ve otherwise. Marty was clearly interfered with and both players (Volchenkov and Gaborik) were probably at fault, but even after seeing the replay plenty of times I still can’t say conclusively if the correct call was made or not as it was THAT close of a play. Certainly can’t kill the ref either way.

HBK27 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:11 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. ©2015 All Rights Reserved.