What I saw, and of course I could be wrong, was Neil missing the puck initially, Henrik's stick hitting it, and then the puck hitting Neil's skate whilst still moving forward.
On the last goal call--I can understand the "inconclusive" ruling. The last shot they showed on the NBCS feed made it look as if Neil kicked over the puck, and that Lundqvist twirling and lunging for the puck is what actually propelled it in.
That actually made sense, since from the first handful of angles we saw it didn't appear conclusive to me that Neil's skate actually contacted the puck. Looked like Lundqvist's stick/glove added the extra propulsion when he went to cover.
I'm always on board with being super critical of the the reffing in the NHL, but I think that call was legitimate. If you asked nyr2k2, impartial hockey fan, whether or not that was conclusive then I'd have to say no. I know I'm in a tiny minority but still.
McKenzie had a valid point on this goal ; he said whether Neil kicked or not - he's got his stick in Hank's midsection & spins him around. If that isn't interferance - what is ?
I was very positively surprised that towards the end of 3rd period, we were able to hold our blue line. I just hope they will be able to do it for 60 minutes
On the last goal call--I can understand the "inconclusive" ruling. The last shot they showed on the NBCS feed made it look as if Neil kicked over the puck, and that Lundqvist twirling and lunging for the puck is what actually propelled it in.
That actually made sense, since from the first handful of angles we saw it didn't appear conclusive to me that Neil's skate actually contacted the puck. Looked like Lundqvist's stick/glove added the extra propulsion when he went to cover.
I'm always on board with being super critical of the the reffing in the NHL, but I think that call was legitimate. If you asked nyr2k2, impartial hockey fan, whether or not that was conclusive then I'd have to say no. I know I'm in a tiny minority but still.
Like I said before. I've been watching this team a long time including all the years Henke has played for us...that far from makes me an expert but I have never seen him that fired up about a call before...
His face was less than three feet from it...I believe him.
McKenzie had a valid point on this goal ; he said whether Neil kicked or not - he's got his stick in Hank's midsection & spins him around. If that isn't interferance - what is ?
Yeah that was a terrible miss. The kick ultimately doens't matter, the refs have to be on top of that and whistle it down.
I admit McDonagh was leaning on Neil, but Neil got his stick in first so anything after that should be interference. Can't just let a guy push a goalie out of the net and kick a puck in.
Also, beyond all that, Kreider's shot was really nice. Yeah he kinda had a bit of an "open net" but he put it just inside the post where Anderson couldn't quite get to. If he just slams that at the net, Anderson probably makes the save
How big do you guys think was the Prust fight in turning things around? He clearly lost the fight, but i think just addressing the guy who knocked out Boyle and had been pushing the rangers around provided a psych lift.
McKenzie had a valid point on this goal ; he said whether Neil kicked or not - he's got his stick in Hank's midsection & spins him around. If that isn't interferance - what is ?
Such a bad call on too many levels. It was probably the worst call by the NHL in years....and that is saying something.
I thought and said exactly that...Torts has to let them fists fly...give them an umphhh..up until than they were being pushed around in the school yard.
Someones got to get it there
