First and foremost, I'm not sure the NHL's judgement in upholding Tyler Seguin's overtime goal was "give me something to break!" bad. I understand why David Rittich disagrees, as it sort of feels like his reward for having a cat-like recovery after being treated as a speed bump in Jamie Benn's reckless road to a loose puck was immediately facing a point blank shot from one of the best snipers in the sport with the game on the line. However, as far as the extremely loose letter of a polarizing law is concerned, he technically did have a chance to make the save. Contrary to what his regained form might have you believe, it was comparable to the chance one might have at catching a ball that's thrown at their face as the lights in a dark room are being turned back on. Still, taking into consideration the vast amount of times in which the league displays inexplicably dumbass decision making, you have to pick your battles. Ipso facto, I see both sides of the coin so I personally wouldn't freak out over the results of its flipping. That's not really the point here though. The point is that David Rittich's reaction to a debatable ruling is entirely relatable. They've gotten more consistent as of late, but had the fans in attendance been armed with hockey sticks while the NHL was tripping over the tail they tucked between their legs in trying to define goaltender interference last season then arenas very well may have looked like the following scene out of 300... 
The NHL might have a little something to say about hurling a splintered projectile in the general direction of an official (that didn't even make the final call, mind you), but - as far as I am concerned - the steam David Rittich let off in getting heated on the ice is entirely understandable. That poor stick might not have had it coming, but a punch-drunk process that only now is starting to show signs of sobering up sure did.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
Categories
All
Archives
January 2020
|
RSS Feed
