|
Here we go.........
"The puck is sitting openly in the crease prior to the unheard whistle, but the referees ruled in their huddle that Sissons did not make contact with it to send it into the net until after the whistle. That means the play was ineligible for video review.
These things can be awfully close, which begs the question of whether the referees could correctly gauge when Sissons got the puck versus when the whistle was blown, and whether a review could help there. In October, the Flames were given a goal that had been waved off, and it’s not abundantly clear Michael Frolik makes contact prior to the whistle. So there’s precedent to at least review something like that if it’s really close.
But if the referees were convinced the whistle came before Sissons’ contact, they followed Rule 38.4 properly."
From SB Nation
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
__________________
Enemy of the State
Brandolini’s Law: It takes hours more time, research, and writing to debunk misinformation than it takes to spread it.
|