Jump to content
The Official Site of the Montréal Canadiens

Game #58 Wed, 15 Feb 2012 Bruins @ Canadiens


Forever_Habs10

Recommended Posts

You saw that too. Worst part, the one ref let it go, believe it was the ref farther away who called it.

Yup. If the ref closer to the play lets it go, don't get why the back one gets to make the call. And the incorrect one at that!

Pleks must have shot that high enough to hit Chara in the head...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

not a great period to say the least <_<

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And that's not a penalty either! Eller hit him on the follow-through... which is NOT a penalty, even if he whiffed on the puck.

There's something in the rulebook about a wild swing or something deemed to be a "wild swing" at a bouncing puck or a puck you fan on being a penalty. Even if it's a follow through, if it goes too high? I'm not sure exactly, It makes it kind of a gray area.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is the rule:

However, a player is permitted accidental contact on an opponent if the act is committed as a normal windup or follow through of a shooting motion. A wild swing at a bouncing puck would not be considered a normal windup or follow through and any contact to an opponent above the height of the shoulders shall be penalized accordingly.

It was NOT a wild swing from Eller, he just whiffed on the shot. But it was still a "shooting motion" as noted in the rule... awful call.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is the rule:

However, a player is permitted accidental contact on an opponent if the act is committed as a normal windup or follow through of a shooting motion. A wild swing at a bouncing puck would not be considered a normal windup or follow through and any contact to an opponent above the height of the shoulders shall be penalized accordingly.

It was NOT a wild swing from Eller, he just whiffed on the shot. But it was still a "shooting motion" as noted in the rule... awful call.

I'm on the fence on it after reading the rule. On one hand he did miss the puck and hit, on the other hand he was looking to move the puck towards the net.

However, the fact of the matter on the call was that it was just outside of the zone which could be construed as not going to be a shot on goal.

Guess it's all in the interpretation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We actually played a solid first period,

Did it not take them half the period before the got a registered shot on goal?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...