Welcome to the Newschoolers forums! You may read the forums as a guest, however you must be a registered member to post. Register to become a member today!
The Senators had been called twice for goalie interference earlier in the game – including one on Spezza where Carey Price clearly sold the call – and had also had a second-period goal disallowed amid nebulous circumstances.
The league issued the following statement immediately following a video review.
“At 14:50 of the second period in the Ottawa Senators/Montreal Canadiens game, the Situation Room initiated video review after the puck entered the Montreal net. The referee informed the Situation Room that after a referee's huddle, it was determined Ottawa's Colin Greening made incidental contact with Montreal's Carey Price prior to the puck entering the net. The referee informed the Situation Room that he had also called a tripping penalty on Montreal's Lars Eller during the play. This is not a reviewable play, therefore the referee's call on the ice stands. No goal Ottawa. Penalty Montreal.”
All well and good, except the original call on the ice was actually a goal: Furlatt pointed to the puck as it slid into the neat.
And after the review, he took to the in-rink P.A. system to announce that the call had been changed because net was knocked off prior to the puck crossing (which replays showed it had, making it the correct decision).
However, the league’s note makes no mention of the net, and if a penalty was called, how could it be incidental contact? And why was the call changed on the ice?
“That’s confusing for me,” Ottawa coach Paul MacLean said afterward.
and then it later says
In February of 2013, then-Senator Jakob Silvferberg was whistled for a dubious goalie interference penalty, wiping out a goal in what became a 2-1 loss to the Habs in Montreal.
After the game, referees apparently told Ottawa captain Jason Spezza that there was no whistle on the play because the building was too loud.
"I have no idea what that means," said Sens coach Paul MacLean. "That's the explanation we got. I'm confused."
"