Refs Rob Rangers of Two Goals
I'm not one to make excuses. And the Rangers especially don't deserve any when they lose to an Ottawa team playing without Erik Karlsson, Jason Spezza and Milan Michalek, who also lost their starting goaltender to injury in the third period. But they were completely jobbed out of two goals in the third period.
The first came on the controversial play early in the period when Chris Kreider was tripped by Ottawa's Marc Methot and crashed into goaltender Craig Anderson. While everyone was preoccupied with the collision they missed the puck actually go into the net but come immediately out when Anderson bumps the pipe. Watch here...
...there is absolutely no reason that shouldn't have been a goal. It crossed the goal line before the goal was dislodged and the whistle blew. Plus there was no penalty on Kreider so the goal wouldn't have been wiped out.
...that's just a terrible job by everyone missing that. The refs, the Toronto war room, Sam & Joe and the Rangers. How is someone on the Blueshirts staff not watching for something like that?
The next screw job came shortly after, when the referee was in terrible position, lost site of the puck and blew just an atrocious quick whistle that negated what would have been Jeff Halpern's first goal as a Ranger to tie the game at 1-1.
...i'm sorry, as a ref you have to put yourself in the correct position to see the puck at all times and if you lose sight of it for a second you shouldn't immediately blow the whistle. Disgraceful
...with the Rangers struggling to score they could ill afford to have two goals missed. And with them losing in the shootout it ultimately cost them the game.
Remember to follow me on Twitter & Facebook or e-mail me at This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. .
@TheNYRBlog the first one they can just say incidental contact no penalty but still no goal. Second one. AMEN I scream about that daily.Lazy
@TheNYRBlog Wow, I missed that the Kreider/Anderson mess was a goal til I read this! Refs missed it too tho so I guess I shouldnt feel bad
I don't think it should have counted because Anderson didn't have a chance to make the save.
@Van_Ness_WVU Like it or not, it would have been a delayed call with the goal negating the penalty. Anderson didn't have a chance to make the save because of a dumb play by his defenseman.
Two rds cover the problem: Steven Walkom. One of the worst there is, and he was the HEAD of the officials last year? The NHL is a joke, like Shanny making sure players are "protected", yeah, the ones who commit the bad hits are protected...
Wow! Got to admit that I didn't even notice that or catch it initially. That is terrible that the war room didn't review it.
The second one they were absolutely robbed on, but the first one would actually fall under the incidental contact with the goaltender rule. If you remember, the ensuing faceoff was outside the zone. The refs can rule no penalty on the play but that the offending player still interfered with the keeper's chance to make a save. That's how they saw it. Right or wrong that's within the scope of their judgment.
Lenny, obvious from the overhead view in the video. If you can pause it when puck is crossing the line you'll see.
Not that it matters but Torts said after the game that it was a goal: http://www.nyrangersblog.com/2013-articles/february/video-torts-fumes-after-loss-to-senators.html
With Anderson already out of the game with a serious-looking injury, I'll bet anything the ref intended on making his whistle "quicker" on any play where the Rangers would have the chance to chop away at Bishop while he tries to control the puck. The Halpern play was definitely one of those, with Rangers all around the crease. I still agree that the ref was 100% wrong with that quick whistle, I just wouldn't be surprised if it was preconceived thing to ensure the Senators don't lose both their goalies after the first one went down in such spectacular fashion.
Oh yeah, and they flat-out missed the tripping call on Methot of course. It's harder to fault them on the "goal" on that play though, given the circumstances. I would have been OK with just a PP.
Next time a team is ready to score, Girardi should push the nearest opponent into Hank to negate the goal. lol. While not hurting "The King"of course.
Yeah, it went in, but Kreider was already touching Anderson before that. I'm definitely not gonna make a case for that one. We did deserve another PP for it though.
@Ty Galpin It would have been a delayed call with the goal negating the penalty. Play never stops for a penalty until the other team touches the puck or the puck is in the net. Anderson didn't have a chance to make the save because of a dumb play by his defenseman.
2 Like
PS Del Zotto is the slowest defender we have on the ice. Can't get back into position. He needs a conditioning stint somewhere....off the ice.... in the press box... where ever..
The Ref raises his hands as soon as Kreider collides with Anderson and the shot is taken as he's raising his hands to blow his whistle. It's all about intent - if he intended to blow the play dead - it's dead - even before the whistle is actually blown so I doubt this would have counted even if the puck was obviously in the net. Sucks either way.
The quick whistle sucks too but it's the same principal. Wish Hank got as many quick whistles around his crease. seems like there's always mad scrambles infront of him - puck no where in sight and no whistle.
@chrisD Puck is already to the end boards when whistle is blown. Intent to blow is another story.
We've seen goals waved off due to incidental contact with the goalie in the past. Sorry Kev, no goal, right call.
@GraigGiuliani gotta agree...if this play had happened to Hank would anyone here be okay with it being a goal?
@Andrew794 @GraigGiuliani -- yeah, i hate to admit it, but it looks like no goal ... because Kreider has already made contact with Anderson when the puck gets there.
@AG_Blue @Andrew794 @GraigGiuliani Whatever, it should have been a goal because it's the Rangers.
@TheNYRBlog I like how Sam (who I like but not so much w/out JD) and Joe both say they didn't see what happened? What were they doing?
Did that go under the net or through the net? The net moves as the puck changes direction. My eyes could be playing tricks.
@bmitchelf Torts mentioned it during he press conference, so I looked back at the clip and low and behold.
@TheNYRBlog What the hell? Why didn't they question the goal at the time? #tortsisanidiot @ScottyHockey
@bmitchelf @TheNYRBlog the refs have screwed up calls around the NHL this year. Can't bitch at them, just rage at the failures of the NYR...
@TheNYRBlog such bullshit is right, we played good last night, said for a few huge breakdowns.
@TheNYRBlog didn't see game down here in Naples but the miller miss was tough! Thanks for keeping us posted on here
Wow, that first was was clear as day on the replay...IF you're looking for it. I doubt anyone was looking for it though because it really appeared to just go through the crease on most of the replays. Even on the overhead, it happened in a flash so I'm not surprised that Sam and Joe missed it. The overhead was pretty clear, but the puck wasn't the main attraction. The 2nd was egregious, but hopefully at some point Karma comes back to the Rangers in a good way later in the season. I guess Bettman was at the controls in Toronto, just another chance to screw the Rangers...LOL!
