Podcast (Audio) Former NHL Refeere Tim Peel Discusses the Rangers overturned goal

[Will Hunting]

The Penguins should have had a 5-on-3 powerplay for full 2 minutes in 1st period already tho. I understand the overturning of Lindgren´s 5 minute major, but there was an obvious boarding by Fox on Guentzel on the same play. So they overturned a major and didn´t call a boarding on Fox there. After that, the calls went the Penguins way, but that one was quite significant too.

 

[NickyFotiu]

I have no doubt we were benefactors in some fixed calls.

Is it incompetence and "just missing calls" when you don't call routine icing like 3 to 4 times in a row in one period, all for the same team?

If they fixed the game for Pitt they did a horrible job unless their goal was to wait until many in the audience fell asleep for Pitt to win the game. Was Messier in on the fix? He said our goal should not have counted. I think it should have counted but understand some calls are 50-50 calls that could go either way. Reffing is not easy. Sometimes they make bad mistakes. Actually come to think of it the refs on the ice said it was a good goal so that is a strange way for them to fix the game. It was overruled by off ice officials.

 

[Cuckoo4Kakko]

If they fixed the game for Pitt they did a horrible job unless their goal was to wait until many in the audience fell asleep for Pitt to win the game. Was Messier in on the fix? He said our goal should not have counted. I think it should have counted but understand some calls are 50-50 calls that could go either way. Reffing is not easy. Sometimes they make bad mistakes. Actually come to think of it the refs on the ice said it was a good goal so that is a strange way for them to fix the game. It was overruled by off ice officials.

Reffing live is not easy. Watching a replay is. If it's 50-50 like you say, you go with what was called on the ice. Easy.

 

[NickyFotiu]

Reffing live is not easy. Watching a replay is. If it's 50-50 like you say, you go with what was called on the ice. Easy.

I think it should have counted but I as not there. I still can be honest that it was a very tough call.

 

[RangerBlues]

Go blow it out his butthole. Its nonsense.

 

[ohbaby]

Horseshit! These hypotheticals are meaningless. Whether Kakko would have went into the goalie anyway without getting bumped doesn't make a difference. He WAS bumped while they were moving quickly to the net. He wasn't leaned on, as this former ref implies,... he was clearly bumped, and at that speed it doesn't take much. So it doesn't matter what if. All that matters, is what transpired. He was bumped into the goalie, before Kakko made contact period. That makes it the Pens fault for what happened.

Christ! Even the Pens own announcer says it's a good goal.



If the Rangers lose this series, this will leave a very bad taste no matter what happens further. And to think, this is only the first game.

 

[egelband]

The correlation is astounding and so obvious. I don't understand how this hasn't caught on to more people.

Gambling is bad. It's worse when the leagues allow it, it completely undermines the legitimacy of the games.

After last night's game, if I were an NHL exec I would be rallying for a serious investigation into these refs and the league. Obviously they won't make the bets themselves but their friends and family can.

Considering the NHL is a beneficiary, I can’t imagine them kicking off an investigation.
Basically, the league is meandering into pro wrestling territory. And no one who has any influence gives a care.
Seriously, putting your thumb on the scale to keep games close is not huge leap from pre-determining the winner.

 

[Baby Punisher]

That was a good interview.

 

[Talisman_52]

If the goal was disallowed due to “goalie interference”, why wasn’t a penalty given to Kakko?

I think Dumoulin was responsible for forcing Kakko into the goalie and then was also responsible for keeping the goalie from getting back to the crease. I think we were totally robbed on a call that was originally ruled a good goal.

 

[Row I Goon]

Regardless of all the talk I think everyone will agree that there’s a ”smell” from Game 1…..

 

[BBKers]

Bad call. Bad refs. Game not literęrally "fixed" but refs can be partial anyways

 

[ajdj10]

The would've been called a good goal if it was the other way around.
Without question.
Number 1 bullshit.

 

[Scott r]

The decision has been made and it's onto game 2 ...why would this be discussed so much ..its in the past move on. The better thing here is how a backup goalie and a 3rd string concession stand goalie won this game. Pitts hit like 4 or 5 goal posts cross bars in the ots..wow. better discussion is chytil leaving malkin the great alone in front of the goalie. By the way..bill Smith never allows malkin alone like that....Pitts up 1 zip onto game 2

The would've been called a good goal if it was the other way around.
Without question.
Number 1 bullshit.

You feel it's rigged egc..then don't follow it mo more. If a girl cheats on a guy u dump her..if you feel officiating has been biased over the 82xyears 1 cup rangersxthen do t follow it...seems easy.

 

[Peltz]

Sports betting has been legal in multiple states for years the world does not revolve around New York allowing mobile betting

Seriously. Take off the tinfoil hat people.

Bad reffing has been there my entire life. It’s part of the game.

 

[Peltz]

If the goal was allowed due to “goalie interference”, why wasn’t a penalty given to Chytil?

I think Dumoulin was responsible for forcing chytil into the goalie and then was also responsible for keeping the goalie from getting back to the crease. I think we were totally robbed on a call that was originally ruled a good goal.

You mean Kakko right?

 

[The New Russian Five]

The correlation is astounding and so obvious. I don't understand how this hasn't caught on to more people.

Gambling is bad. It's worse when the leagues allow it, it completely undermines the legitimacy of the games.

After last night's game, if I were an NHL exec I would be rallying for a serious investigation into these refs and the league. Obviously they won't make the bets themselves but their friends and family can.

You really think an NHL exec would want it to get out if refs were fixing games. Their soul responsibility is to increase profits. Putting a light on a gambling scandal that will generate in loss of value to the league isn't exactly something they want.

 

[Talisman_52]

You mean Kakko right?

Yes. I edited my post. Thanks for catching that.

 

[Glen Sathers Cigar]

It's not refs or the league fixing games. The ref are just incompetent.

Refs focus way too much on calling a "fair" game and managing the flow of the game. You can't call every infraction because the entire game would be special teams, but you need to have a set standard that you use for this game. If you're letting certain things go you have to keep that standard. What we see far too often is refs letting tons of things go and then calling some random minor infraction out of nowhere.

And I get swallowing the whistle in the playoffs, but Pittsburgh only got called for 1 penalty in 5 and a half periods - 0 in the final 5 periods. Matheson commits interference and obstruction every single shift he's out there, Crosby was slashing after the whistle, Guentzel punching Kreider and messing with Miller. Plenty of opportunities for them to get called for another penalty. But then the refs don't wanna call it because it's a tied game and they don't want to control the outcome of the game by calling a penalty but they end up controlling the outcome of the game by not calling the penalty. But Pittsburgh got a 5v3 after we went up 3-2 on a very soft call that Guentzel clearly sold hard, do they get that call if they're winning 3-2? Probably not. This is why game management is so stupid.

Set your standard early in the game and the players will adjust to your standard and then you consistently call the game based on your standard regardless of score. That's all fans want, consistency.

 

[McRanger92]

I don’t have a problem with the call on trouba if it were at ES (though the Pens got away with plenty of shit at ES that could have been whistled. Matheson in particular is guilty of obstruction on almost every shift.)

What I have a problem with is that it was called while the pens already had a PP. it almost always takes something completely overboard, especially in the playoffs to generate a 5 on 3 unless we’re talking delay of game. Strome was egregiously hooked on the Rangers lone PP (by carter, I think) and it went uncalled. It was basically a life line thrown to Pitt in response to the Rangers scoring SH.

I was sitting close to a bunch of Ranger alumni and they couldn't believe the call. It probably was a penalty, but it was such soft call to make at that point of the game and it took all the Rangers momentum away

 

[Raspewtin]

If the goal was disallowed due to “goalie interference”, why wasn’t a penalty given to Kakko?

I think Dumoulin was responsible for forcing chytil into the goalie and then was also responsible for keeping the goalie from getting back to the crease. I think we were totally robbed on a call that was originally ruled a good goal.

unfortunately the rule is pretty clear that the goalie nor the defender have no obligation to prevent contact, it was 100% on Kakko regardless of what Dumolin did. it's why that goal against the devils with 2 seconds left where Volchenkov judo threw Anisimov into Brodeur was reversed. it's a f***ing terrible rule and not called consistently. the best example being Dwight King in game 2.......... god f***ing dammit

a

The Penguins should have had a 5-on-3 powerplay for full 2 minutes in 1st period already tho. I understand the overturning of Lindgren´s 5 minute major, but there was an obvious boarding by Fox on Guentzel on the same play. So they overturned a major and didn´t call a boarding on Fox there. After that, the calls went the Penguins way, but that one was quite significant too.

and your shit stain team got away with 4-5 clear as day trips and interference so pardon me for not giving a f***

 

[will1066]

If the goal was disallowed due to “goalie interference”, why wasn’t a penalty given to Kakko?

I think Dumoulin was responsible for forcing chytil into the goalie and then was also responsible for keeping the goalie from getting back to the crease. I think we were totally robbed on a call that was originally ruled a good goal.

I always have the thought that they are acknowledging that it really should be a goal -- they can't award it due to technicality -- and not assessing an interference penalty is sort of a compensation for damages incurred.

Change the rule. That'll fix it.

 

[tomobson]

The Penguins should have had a 5-on-3 powerplay for full 2 minutes in 1st period already tho. I understand the overturning of Lindgren´s 5 minute major, but there was an obvious boarding by Fox on Guentzel on the same play. So they overturned a major and didn´t call a boarding on Fox there. After that, the calls went the Penguins way, but that one was quite significant too.

That could have been a 2 for diving from Guentzel as well. He was crying and tipping over from contact all night long.

 

[Talisman_52]

unfortunately the rule is pretty clear that the goalie nor the defender have no obligation to prevent contact, it was 100% on Kakko regardless of what Dumolin did. it's why that goal against the devils with 2 seconds left where Volchenkov judo threw Anisimov into Brodeur was reversed. it's a f***ing terrible rule and not called consistently. the best example being Dwight King in game 2.......... god f***ing dammit

I get your point. But if they are following a rule to a T in that situation and not using common sense, how can they call no goal due to goaltender interference and then not give Kakko 2 minutes? I think that shows that they took some liberties with the ruling (as they should have).

If the argument is that the goalie couldn’t return to the crease to play the puck, my argument is that Dumoulin really prevented that when he also made contact with the goalie.

Even after 2 days, I’m still pretty hot about it. I guess that means I’ve really missed playoff hockey.

 

[romba]

Refs prefer no goal in this case, no goals leads to toe game and let’s the players decide the outcome and no one will remember the no goal in 15 years, call it a goal and they feel more ‘responsible’ having a direct impact on the outcome due to the goal being so late and GWG. Just a thought that might subconsciously affect the decision on a close call.

 

[Unpredictable1]

Exactly. That call being made while Pittsburgh was already on the PP in a playoff game was completely absurd to me.

We would never get that call our way, roles reversed if Pens scored the shorty then we'd get an immediate penalty after to even up the field lol