Comments on: AHL: Oops, that goal shouldn’t have counted

By: lesleyvissersfacelift

lesleyvissersfacelift — Sat, 09 Jun 2012 10:57:11 +0000

I agree with your interpretation too. Difficult call.

By: 28giroux28

28giroux28 — Sat, 09 Jun 2012 03:45:46 +0000

While this does make a certain amount of sense, the problem with your interpretation lies in how you defined a SOG. You say that it is not a true SOG because Kostka did not intend to hit that not. That does not matter, however, as a SOG is defined as any shot that either enters the goal or requires a save by the goaltender. That is why deflections, strang hops of blocked passes, certain face-off wins and even bounces off the station are considered SOG’s.

As to your second point, I actually think your right, except “the goal shall be disallowed as the original shot was off-side,” may mean that once the shot is taken during an off-sides delay, any goals are discounted regardless of how long it takes for the puck to enter the goal or the position of the players at that time.

By: lesleyvissersfacelift

lesleyvissersfacelift — Sat, 09 Jun 2012 01:29:29 +0000

I agree with this interpretation. I would have posted the same thing had you not beaten me to it. I am surprised the AHL said the refs got it wrong.

By: Geoff Nichols

Geoff Nichols — Fri, 08 Jun 2012 18:15:44 +0000

“If the puck is shot on goal during a delayed off-side, the play shall be allowed to continue under the normal clearing-the-zone rules. Should the puck, as a result of this shot, enter the defending team’s goal during a delayed off-side, either directly or off the goalkeeper, a player or an official on the ice, the goal shall be disallowed as the original shot was off-side. The face-off will be conducted at the face-off spot in the zone closest to the point of origin of the shot or at the nearest face-off spot in the neutral zone adjacent to the attacking zone of the offending team.”

1. The puck was not shot on goal, it was a dump attempt that took a weird bounce. Just because it goes in the books as a SOG and Kostka gets credit for the goal doesn’t mean it was an actual SOG.
2. If you want to count it as a SOG, the “the play shall be allowed to continue under the normal clearing-the-zone rules” clause could be interpreted as meaning that as long as the players are back onside before the puck goes in the net, they’re good to go. The were back onside by the time the puck went in.

By: lsxphotog

lsxphotog — Fri, 08 Jun 2012 17:57:40 +0000

I agree, it really doesn’t matter because the Admirals have dominated the AHL this year and the playoffs, but WOW, what a bad call. It has to be painful to lose a game to a botched call on a fluke goal. Man…

By: quonce

quonce — Fri, 08 Jun 2012 17:30:23 +0000

For anyone who hasn’t seen Norfolk play this year, this team is legit. 20+ game winning streak during the season and have just been steamrolling everyone.

Horrific call, but Norfolk was winning the Calder regardless. They are a better team than Columbus Montreal and if not for Stamkos, I think they could rival their parent club Tampa.

One of the best Ahl teams in years.

By: greej1938l

greej1938l — Fri, 08 Jun 2012 17:15:41 +0000

Awful. 3-0. Coulda been 2-1 series count

By: ruddigervancity

ruddigervancity — Fri, 08 Jun 2012 16:58:26 +0000

Sorry – two offside. Still brutal.

By: ruddigervancity

ruddigervancity — Fri, 08 Jun 2012 16:57:40 +0000

I actually count three players offside. That’s brutal. Almost as bad as the Admirals’ jerseys.

By: stakex

stakex — Fri, 08 Jun 2012 16:31:58 +0000

Wow, thats just awful.

I wouldn’t expect that bad of a call in a D league game, let alone a 2nd tier pro league.