OT: Sarah Nurse's Canadian Team Upset in IIHF Womens World's

[eebmg]

Just by accident, I caught the end of the Canadians being upset by Finland in the 1st Semi's 4-2. Sarah Nurse was voted one of the 3 best on her team but tears all around.

Congratulations to Finland for the massive upset.

US vs Russia at 1PM on NHL Network for anyone interested.

 

[warbler1055]

Always interested in Kia and family news. Hockey between US and Canada is always very competitive since lots of players attend the same schools.

 

[eebmg]

Intermittently watching the Bronze match. Canada safely up 5-0 over Russia with 8' left in the 3rd. I know Sarah Nurse had an assist on the 3rd goal.

 

[eebmg]

OMG. USA won on penalty shots but if you look at the linked highlights, Finland seemed to score in OT to win 2-1. I don't know the technical reason why the
goal was disallowed. The announcers thought it would stand.

 

[Adios]

Finland was robbed.

 

[warbler1055]

Exciting game!!! OT, Finland scored and celebrated!!! Referee looked at the replay and gave the no goal hand signal!! No sure why or what. Shoot out 2-1 US won!!!"This is the most bizarre ending" said the announcer!!! Thanks for posting!!!

 

[JeannoCT]

I thought there was goalie interference, according to the announcers. Felt bad for Finland.

 

[lne001]

Finnish player took out the US goalie who was still in the crease. The goalie knew this instantly and began protesting. Correct call.

Edit: Originally incorrectly said Canadian player.

 

[eebmg]

Canadian player took out the US goalie who was still in the crease. The goalie knew this instantly and began protesting. Correct call.

Not Canada. Finland.

 

[stamfordhusky]

Canadian player took out the US goalie who was still in the crease. The goalie knew this instantly and began protesting. Correct call.

Definitely not a correct call. First, the contact occurred entirely outside of the crease. The skater and the part of the goalie's body that made contact were entirely out of the crease. And the goalie initiated the contact. In fact, the goalie was penalized for illegally making contact with the skater! Thus Finland ended up with a power play but bizarrely, and incorrectly, had the goal negated. And don't forget the call on the ice was that the goal was good, so there needed to be compelling evidence -which did not exist - to overturn the goal.

It would have taken the NHL no more than 30 seconds to look at the replay and correctly count the goal.

 

[stamfordhusky]

In the above, I should have mentioned that for it to be interference, the attacker must "initiate" the contact in that situation. In fact, the goalie initiated the contact - and the referee apparently agreed since she penalized the goalie.

 

[UConnLen]

In the above, I should have mentioned that for it to be interference, the attacker must "initiate" the contact in that situation. In fact, the goalie initiated the contact - and the referee apparently agreed since she penalized the goalie.

Apparently a lne001 and the referees don’t agree with you, so maybe the rules are different in the NFL?

 

[lne001]

"The overtime goal scored by Team Finland against Team USA was reviewed and disallowed by the Video Goal Judge Operations, due to non-incidental goaltender interference.

Two IIHF Playing Rules were considered in this instance:

-According to IIHF Playing Rule 186 v. Goaltender and Goal/Goal Crease Disallowed: An attacking skater who makes contact other than incidental with a goaltender who is out of his goal crease during game action will be assessed a minor penalty for interference. If a goal is scored at this time, it will not count.

-According to IIHF Playing Rule 183 ii. Protection of a Goaltender: Incidental contact is allowed when the goaltender is in the act of playing the puck outside his goal crease, provided the attacking skater makes a reasonable effort to minimize or avoid such contact. "

 

[Pinhead]

Finland was robbed you say? Rumor is Jessie James and Billy the Kid made inquiries to the official review crew afterwards as to how to up their own games! Bernie Madoff was aghast at their audacity! Frank Abagnale said "why didn't I think of that?" Goalie was completely out of the crease, and for crying out loud... was assessed a penalty! How can goaltender interference negate a goal, yet the same play result in a penalty on the goaltender? On-ice crew called it a goal too. The only thing more egregious than the outcome of the review was the amount of time it took to make it! On top of the dreadful and baffling reversal, I'll argue that it's repercussions might cut much deeper and set the game back to some extent. What could possibly be better for international women's hockey than a European team to finally unseat a North American team? A true renaissance moment for IIHF Women's Hockey pissed away by a unexpainable call says I. Props to the hometown Finns for not rioting.

 

[Adios]

"The overtime goal scored by Team Finland against Team USA was reviewed and disallowed by the Video Goal Judge Operations, due to non-incidental goaltender interference.

Two IIHF Playing Rules were considered in this instance:

-According to IIHF Playing Rule 186 v. Goaltender and Goal/Goal Crease Disallowed: An attacking skater who makes contact other than incidental with a goaltender who is out of his goal crease during game action will be assessed a minor penalty for interference. If a goal is scored at this time, it will not count.

-According to IIHF Playing Rule 183 ii. Protection of a Goaltender: Incidental contact is allowed when the goaltender is in the act of playing the puck outside his goal crease, provided the attacking skater makes a reasonable effort to minimize or avoid such contact. "

The attacking skater was not trying to interfere. The goalie attacked the skater and left the goal open. Totally robbery. In women's ice hockey, of all sports. That's unreal.

 

[stamfordhusky]

Finland was robbed you say? Rumor is Jessie James and Billy the Kid made inquiries to the official review crew afterwards as to how to up their own games! Bernie Madoff was aghast at their audacity! Frank Abagnale said "why didn't I think of that?" Goalie was completely out of the crease, and for crying out loud... was assessed a penalty! How can goaltender interference negate a goal, yet the same play result in a penalty on the goaltender? On-ice crew called it a goal too. The only thing more egregious than the outcome of the review was the amount of time it took to make it! On top of the dreadful and baffling reversal, I'll argue that it's repercussions might cut much deeper and set the game back to some extent. What could possibly be better for international women's hockey than a European team to finally unseat a North American team? A true renaissance moment for IIHF Women's Hockey pissed away by a unexpainable call says I. Props to the hometown Finns for not rioting.

Agree on all counts.

 

[stamfordhusky]

"The overtime goal scored by Team Finland against Team USA was reviewed and disallowed by the Video Goal Judge Operations, due to non-incidental goaltender interference.

Two IIHF Playing Rules were considered in this instance:

-According to IIHF Playing Rule 186 v. Goaltender and Goal/Goal Crease Disallowed: An attacking skater who makes contact other than incidental with a goaltender who is out of his goal crease during game action will be assessed a minor penalty for interference. If a goal is scored at this time, it will not count.

-According to IIHF Playing Rule 183 ii. Protection of a Goaltender: Incidental contact is allowed when the goaltender is in the act of playing the puck outside his goal crease, provided the attacking skater makes a reasonable effort to minimize or avoid such contact. "

These two rules are more evidence on why the goal should have counted, since the skater didn't violate either of them. The goalie was the one who didn't make an effort to avoid contact and the goalie was the one penalized. Just a travesty of justice by a group of people who apparently know nothing about hockey.

 

[stamfordhusky]

Apparently a lne001 and the referees don’t agree with you, so maybe the rules are different in the NFL?

The referee thought the goal should have counted. The group that overturned the call ignored the rules. One of the worst rulings in the history of sports.

 

[UConnLen]

The referee thought the goal should have counted. The group that overturned the call ignored the rules. One of the worst rulings in the history of sports.

Sorry the video goal judge ruled NO GOAL! I am not saying it was the right call or not, but come on “ the worst ruling in the history of sports”??? I’m probably a bit older than you and can think of quite a few worse than that!

 

[BigBird]

Sorry the video goal judge ruled NO GOAL! I am not saying it was the right call or not, but come on “ the worst ruling in the history of sports”??? I’m probably a bit older than you and can think of quite a few worse than that!

Such as the 1972 Olympics - men’s basketball... the odor of that one endures.

 

[MSGRET]

The referee thought the goal should have counted. The group that overturned the call ignored the rules. One of the worst rulings in the history of sports.

Heck the Rams - Saints game had the worse call in history, actually it was a NON Call, but it was worse then this.