@Ligue nationale de hockey

Pas de défi des entraîneurs


Pas de défi des entraîneurs




No-ConspiracyTheory

26 Comments

  1. psubs07

    At first I read that as like a challenge where 2 teams play without coaches and we see how they do.

    That being said, if the coach challenged it, do you think it would have been ruled « kicked in »?

    Edit: grammar

  2. knowitallz

    There was a call that was reviewed that pretty much showed Calgary scoring a goal in I think game 6 that would have won them the cup. It wasn’t to be and Tampa won. Was this that play?

  3. KhanSpirasi

    IT WAS IN!!!! Calgary Flames Stanley cup champions. I don’t care what the official result was

  4. Investment_Sharp

    Same thing happened to the leafs this year. NHL hasn’t improved 19 years later

  5. The-Reddit-Giraffe

    I always like congratulating Tampa fans on their second ever cup win in 2021

  6. gnortsgerg

    The part that’s always bothered me more is the next play, you see the Calgary player about to get the puck out and the TB player thrusts his legs backwards and trips him causing him to lose possession. That missed penalty call, also cost the Flames the cup.

  7. Bad_Karma19

    Challenges weren’t a thing back then. Only the situation room/video goal judge could stop for a review. Not enough cameras back then either.

  8. Kornchup

    It wasn’t in, sorry Flames fans.

  9. Comfortable-Ad-7158

    Red mile flasher post yesterday: « fuck I loved the 04′ cup run »

    This post today: « fuck I hated the 04′ cup run »

    Just filling this old flames fan with all kinds of emotions thanks r/nhl.

  10. Powerism

    You have to remember that back then there were no coaches challenges, because there were no coaches. Players had to bark at the refs to try to induce them to call the game less objectively. Line changes were fucked – it was just player after player hopping over the bench onto the ice, praying there were only 4 other teammates out there or else you’d be penalized. Didn’t even really have positions, you just went to an open part of the ice, it was absolute chaos. Game today is so soft.

  11. Redditrightreturn1

    It could be interpreted as kicking motion because it was an open footed stop and resembles a kicking motion. Extremely tough call and no idea how the NHL would’ve ruled it now let alone back then. I believe the wording of the rule book is distinct kicking motion but I could be wrong that could only be for youth hockey. I say good goal wasn’t a distinct kicking motion. Side note, damn the game was super fast back then too and has only gotten quicker.

  12. hollywoodhooks

    Yeah, back when hockey was much much better. Fuck the coaches challenge

  13. avsfan96

    Coach can’t challenge that anyway

  14. emptylewis

    Looks like a clear no goal for me

  15. StackThePads33

    There were no coaches challenges back then. The coach would have to bark at the ref so much and risk being fined, but most of the time the refs wouldn’t even think about looking at it

  16. WeeklyDimension1908

    It wasn’t a goal. Are flames fans STILL salty about this?

  17. gord1to

    no kicking motion but also no goal anyway

  18. LumbaJ4cked

    One of the hardest played cup finals in NHL history

  19. NightHawkRambo

    Not definitive enough, side view doesn’t matter. The top-down view wasn’t clear enough to rule it a goal anyways.

  20. Scrubosaurus13

    I personally don’t think it was in, but DAMN it’s got to be close. That was such an amazing series.

  21. Melodic-Bug-9022

    It was never ever reviewed, literally no one thought it was in until they showed replays in the next intermission. That’s why I’m so sick of hearing about this from fellow Flames fans.

  22. DoYouLikeFishsticks0

    Gelinas was quoted later saying that he didn’t even petition to the refs to review it, he just assumed they would 🙄

    It wasn’t in, the guy who shot it didn’t even think it was

    If flames players made a stink for them to look at it, they would have looked at it

  23. SixFootStophy

    isn’t this angle just giving off the parallax effect? I don’t think this puck fully crosses the line.

Write A Comment

Pin