[ad_1]
CALGARY – Still angry at the controversial goal that ended his overtime night, David Rittich suggested his strategy be different.
"Maybe next time I'll be in bed for half an hour," said the Calgary Flames goaltender following a 4-3 loss to Dallas. "If they make this rule, they must get it (consistency). I do not know, this is the second year of the series with this rule, but it is not consistent. "
Just 24 seconds into the night on Wednesday night, Jamie Benn cut behind a sprawling Rittich and through the retreat to recover the puck, catching his foot on the goalie's right pad.
This caused Rittich to continue sliding backwards, which delayed his ability to return to the top of the painting and stand out from Tyler Seguin, who stood alone in the slot with the puck.
Seguin's shot defeated Rittich on the side of the gloves, prompting the 26-year-old Czech goalkeeper to immediately plead his case with the authorities. Clearly, an examination was necessary.
After a few minutes during which the crowd became optimistic, the game continued thanks to the clear contact, the manager took the center of the ice to announce the end of the match.
Toronto's official decision: Rittich has had time to recover.
Rittich immediately broke his stick in half, threw the handle towards the center of the ice and rushed to the referees with words of choice that he could have or not repeated in a silent and deadly locker room .
"He hit me, so I was a little caught, but not 100% ready for anything," he said. "Everyone saw it. I had a little time, but not the complete recovery of the shot. "
Indeed, a complete dose of forgery might have been very useful. The shame of the old Ritter for giving him the college essay. This is clearly the lesson here.
Garage sales at Billy Smith or Dominik Hasek are clearly in order.
"The Toronto decision is that he has had time to reset himself," said coach Bill Peters, who was then asked if he was in agreement with him. 39; call. "Well, every time you consult, it's a little scary. You do not know how it will happen. It could have gone one way or the other. This is obvious contact, but they said he was recovering and had the ability to rescue.
"It's a subject you can discuss all night."
Do not worry, Flames fans were one step ahead of you. That the debate on guardian interference begins again.
The fact is that it is a tiring and frustrating problem that the league has not yet solved and that it will probably never be able to put itself in game order in a game as fast and physical as it is.
Absolutely the call could have gone one way or the other. But act like crazy and slip on the ice like a Gray Cup race and the picture becomes clearer.
Alas, the Flames did not deserve their victory anyway – a point that Peters was quick to point out.
"I think we were lucky enough to get a point of the match tonight," said Peters, who reorganized all his lines in the third period to somehow turn a 2-1 deficit in the second period into a short lead of 3-2. "I did not think we were very good."
When asked what his best tandem was – Johnny Gaudreau and Sean Monahan – Peters smiled.
"There is probably a reason why you are asking this question," said Peters.
"If I look at the bottom of this sheet (score), they are probably less players (yes, the two minus 3.) They were scored in the first quarter and overtime on a controversial game.We needed more of guys. "
The Gaudreau line missed a 41-second check and saw Jason Spezza attack early in a match as the hosts did not tie until late in the game, when Garnet Hathaway slipped a goal back by Anton Khudobin.
The six players on the ice for the Flames were graduates of Stockton Heat – an encouraging sign not to lose for most fans.
Three sets of unsuccessful Flame power in the first one would come back to bite them. The only goal of the second was Benn's 10th, setting up an interesting third.
A goal from Dandy on the power play of Gaudreau and a goal by Mark Giordano 70 seconds into the third half seem to have allowed the Flames to line up to win their seventh win of the year in the third period.
Alas, a goal from Gavin Bayreuther who bounced on a shin guard seven minutes from the end opened the door to the controversy in overtime.
Did Seguin fear that the objective would be rejected?
"When I pulled that, no," he said about his eighth. "When I watched the rebroadcast, no, not really. The goalkeeper went into the game, so I did not think there would have been interference from the goalkeeper. "
Benn added, "I saw it at the bottom of the net – it's all that matters."
[ad_2]
Source link
