Sens vs Avs

[Law]

Decent game last night. Nice to see the boys rebound after a disappointing weekend. I was wondering what other people thought of the Fisher (I believe it was him) hit on the goalie? I do feel that protecting the goalie is important, however he was out challenging the shooter and got run over. Fisher had no where to go and the goalie was well out of his crease. No penalty necessary.

[Pinshark]

I say open the goalies up to be fair game when they come out past the hashmarks....

[Andy4Par]

4 points out of 6 is pretty good, far from disappointing.

[davevandyk]

The hit was Vermette and i think it was a horrible call. He was at least 5 feet outside of the "blue" and should have been fair game. There was no penaltie when Bertuzzi hit Hasek, i guess cause Hasek was comin out to meet Bertuzzi. The goalie was way out of the crease and Vermette could not avoid him,

BAD CALL!! Goalies should be fair game outside of the crease.

[el tigre]

The hit was Vermette and i think it was a horrible call. He was at least 5 feet outside of the "blue" and should have been fair game. There was no penaltie when Bertuzzi hit Hasek, i guess cause Hasek was comin out to meet Bertuzzi. The goalie was way out of the crease and Vermette could not avoid him,

BAD CALL!! Goalies should be fair game outside of the crease.

First of all, I didn't see the game or the hit in question but I will comment on the "fair game outside of the crease" statement.

Some people interpret this to mean that when goaltenders go out their crease, it should be open season on them - i.e., you can bodycheck them, run over them, or whatever. That is simply not true.

When a goalie is out of his crease, he has the same rights as any other player. IOW, you still can't charge him, cross-check him, slash him, elbow him or interfere with him when he doesn't have possession of the puck, etc. You can check him if he has possession of the puck - that's about it.

As I said above, I didn't see the play in question. For those that did (and assuming that the goaltender was indeed out of his crease), ask yourself these questions:

1) Did the goaltender have possession of the puck?
2) Would the same call be made if it was a defenceman instead of a goaltender?

PS: Keep in mind how strictly the NHL is calling "obstruction" penalties this season when you ask yourself these questions.

[Hank Hill]

It was a terrible call. Vermette had pushed the puck ahead of himself and was trying to skate around the goalie, the goalie came out to pokecheck, ended up on the ice infront of Vermette who then tripped over the prostrate goalie. Where was he supposed to go? The goalie left him no option.

The refs were calling every incidental contact in the first 2 periods. There were questionable calls (and non calls) on both sides. I find it no coincidence that when the refs put their whistles in their pockets (3rd period) the Sens ran riot, since they are statistically the best 5 on 5 team in the NHL at the moment.

Again 4 from 6 points was a good dividend, concidering how they played in the Van game and the 3rd period of the Cal game.

[Law]

First of all, I didn't see the game or the hit in question but I will comment on the "fair game outside of the crease" statement.

The hit can be viewed here, http://tsn.ca/audio_video/ under the Ott/Col highlights.

[wopstergolf]

As I said above, I didn't see the play in question. For those that did (and assuming that the goaltender was indeed out of his crease), ask yourself these questions:

1) Did the goaltender have possession of the puck?
2) Would the same call be made if it was a defenceman instead of a goaltender?

PS: Keep in mind how strictly the NHL is calling "obstruction" penalties this season when you ask yourself these questions.

If it had been a defencman instead of the goalie going for the save, the defenceman would have gotten the penalty for interference. that was a completely blown call

[Indio]

[quote=el tigre]First of all, I didn't see the game or the hit in question but I will comment on the "fair game outside of the crease" statement.

1) Did the goaltender have possession of the puck?
2) Would the same call be made if it was a defenceman instead of a goaltender?

el tigre,

I saw the game (and yes, I am a Sens fan) and I thought that Vermette could have avoided hitting him. The goalie had the puck under him. Vermette got a little shove from the Aves defencemen and I in my opinion Vermette took advantage of that 'shove' to run him over thinking he could claim he was pushed into him. Although to say running him over is a big stretch of the imagination. In today's NHL, it was a 'good' call.

Indio (headed for the hills)