In the sense that the NHL and their crew of officials is about as good as explaining themselves in the moment as a man whose been caught with his pants down and his dick up, I do understand the frustration. You've got game-changing goals being waved off, and the best reasoning provided by a professional hockey league is basically that of an irritable mother telling her teenage son to take the garbage out for the tenth time in ten minutes. Simply put, as fans, we deserve better answers than those that more or less amount to "because I said so" from referees that were just given plenty of time to come up with a description of what happened while watching it over and over again at 1/100th of the speed. That being said, now that we have been offered a belated explanation, I fail to see how anyone could say it's one that is definitively wrong...
Questionable? Sure. Controversial? What judgment call that keeps a lead alive in an elimination game isn't? The product of some anti-Capitals conspiracy that serves as undeniable proof that a broken system is broken? Yeaaaaah, no. Because there is legitimately no angle that tells me otherwise, I'm left to believe the puck was loose somewhere underneath Petr Mrazek's pads. Therefore, it stands to reason that using a stick to push said pads, to the point where it undergoes a non-ironic weird flex, back towards the net is primarily what propelled said loose puck into the net... As is the main reason that borderline decisions are deemed to fall on a border's line, I wouldn't have taken issue with whatever direction the NHL happened to fall in ruling on such an impactful play. I'd hear you out if you wanted to argue that it shouldn't matter that Alexander Ovechkin jabbed the goaltender en route to the puck because the goaltender had a better chance of guessing which hand I had my beer in than guessing where the puck was. However, consider me deaf to the incessant and illogical bitching of Capitals' fan that are coming damn close to making my ears bleed. No one is out to get the reigning champs during what's been a preposterously unpredictable postseason where their presence would be even more appreciated in the next round. Referring to a 50/50 call in implying as much is as crazy as Alexander Ovechkin himself, so perhaps the opinion of the person who had their game-tying goal disallowed in the third period of a playoff game isn't the end all, be all. You're entitled to think it's a bad call, but to go to the extreme that it's one that's impossible to understand is objectively idiotic.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
Categories
All
Archives
January 2020
|