Goalie interference and coach’s challenges have been in the spotlight this week, especially after the controversial no-goal against Joffrey Lupul, and the controversial goal scored by Brendan Gallagher. On Saturday night, another play caused a buzz as the Capitals goal against Florida’s Al Montoya was allowed, even though Justin Williams was tangled up with the goalie.
Should the call have been reversed? Here’s our point-counter point.
THE CASE IN FAVOUR OF THE GOAL (Joe Pack)
Though Justin Williams does cross through Al Montoya’s crease, potentially making some contact with the goaltender, it looks to me like Montoya senses this and grabs on to Williams’ stick. If any contact is made here, it is only with the stick and not through a push or shove.
Why would Montoya grab Williams’ stick?
Typically, it would behoove Montoya to throw any kind of body part in front of the puck to make the stop, but with the advent of the coach’s challenge and the knowledge on the part of goalies that extra attention is being paid to interference, I believe Montoya grabbed Williams’ stick like a skater would to draw a hooking penalty.
His momentum is carrying him to his right, away from the rebound, and perhaps he thought his last resort was to get the goal reversed.
I’m all for goaltender’s safety and the rules being upheld, but this was the right call – the goal counts.
It certainly looks better than last night’s absurd reversal.
THE CASE AGAINST THE GOAL (Rory Boylen)
Calls like this one and the Lupul no-goal from Friday night are why I’m firmly on the side of the war room in Toronto having the final say when it comes to goal reviews on coach’s challenges. It’s more likely they’ll get it right on the big screens than the referees using tablets.
In my mind, this is an easy no-goal call. Rule 69.1 in the NHL Rulebook states:
This rule is based on the premise that an attacking player’s position, whether inside or outside the crease, should not, by itself, determine whether a goal should be allowed or disallowed. In other words, goals scored while attacking players are standing in the crease may, in appropriate circumstances be allowed. Goals should be disallowed only if: (1) an attacking player, either by his positioning or by contact, impairs the goalkeeper’s ability to move freely within his crease or defend his goal…
The rule goes on, but this is all you need to know to take back the goal. Did the attacking player (Williams) impair the goaltender’s ability to move freely within his crease or defend his goal? Sure looks to me like he did.
I disagree with Joe’s assessment that Montoya grabbed the stick because you can see the blade wedged between the padding on Montoya’s glove. There’s no doubting that Williams’ stick gets in on Montoya. I’ve heard it suggested the interference didn’t happen until the puck crossed the line, but I see Williams’ stick on Montoya well before the puck crosses the line.
Because of the redirection in front, Montoya is out of position, so making a pad save was nearly impossible. His best chance at making the stop is with the glove, which Williams appears to be interfering with. Would he have actually made what would have been an awesome save? We’ll never know, because he was interfered with.
