Twitter | Search | |
Michael Smith
Official explanations from review/challenge fiasco late in the game in Nashville. It still doesn't make sense, and head coach Rod Brind'Amour was just as confused as the rest of us.
Reply Retweet Like More
bbbbbbb Mar 9
Replying to @MSmithCanes
So it should've been a goal from the start, but Nashville had to challenge to get them to actually look at Boyle's contact and see that he got pushed. Why they didn't look at that while confirming the puck crossed the line is still a mystery.
Reply Retweet Like
neil Mar 9
Replying to @MSmithCanes
That’s not reviewable though. Right?
Reply Retweet Like
Michael Smith Mar 9
Replying to @MSmithCanes
They made the right call in the end, I think, but the process to get there was a doozy. It would have been less confusing had the initial call been no goal due to goaltender interference, but they looked at the play twice and drew two different conclusions.
Reply Retweet Like
H. Wade Minter Mar 9
Replying to @MSmithCanes
Reply Retweet Like
Aidan Calhoun (SCF: 0-0) Mar 9
Replying to @MSmithCanes
If we knew about the change in the first place none of the craziness about it wouldn't have happened
Reply Retweet Like
Bobby Erickson Mar 9
Replying to @MSmithCanes
Reply Retweet Like
Matt Mar 9
its reviewable but it should have been deemed incidental contact
Reply Retweet Like
Tucker Blankinship Mar 9
Replying to @MSmithCanes
It appears they followed correct procedure. Announcement was wrongly worded. Should’ve been made clear that goalie interference was call on ice not call by review.
Reply Retweet Like
J. Austin Carter Mar 9
Reply Retweet Like
FOX Sports Carolinas Mar 9
Replying to @MSmithCanes
Reply Retweet Like
bbbbbbb Mar 9
Replying to @young_pierre24
You can challenge a no goal due to interference if you think there was no contact/the defensive player initiated the contact.
Reply Retweet Like
canadarob7 Mar 9
Replying to @MSmithCanes
The NHL has a hard time understanding their own rules...that’s a fact.
Reply Retweet Like
Douchebag St John Mar 9
Replying to @MSmithCanes
Reply Retweet Like
FOX Sports Carolinas Mar 9
Reply Retweet Like
Todd McGee Mar 9
Replying to @MSmithCanes
It’s poorly written. The first sentence makes it seem like Nashville’s challenge resulted in the goalie interference call. Then it makes it sound like the sitch room looked at it again on their own and decided ‘eh, what the heck. It was interference.’ They need better writers.
Reply Retweet Like
HB in NC Mar 9
Replying to @MSmithCanes
So we can just challenge anything now? brb, challenging the other team's line change. Provided the call goes our way and we don't lose the timeout, thinking of challenging their equipment manager next. I don't like his face.
Reply Retweet Like
Add your name Mar 9
Replying to @MSmithCanes @NHLCanes
Reply Retweet Like
x - Jon Herring Mar 10
Replying to @MSmithCanes @NHLCanes
Nah... Jordan didn’t push him... you can even see StaAl backing out and the other guy fell on his own. It was close but there wasn’t enough evidence to change the decision on the ice IMO
Reply Retweet Like