Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
bob_sauve28

GDT: Devils vs Sabres 4/27/94 8 pm

Recommended Posts

Stevens was a real *****, I forgot some things over the years apparently

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Norcal said:

Stevens was a real *****, I forgot some things over the years apparently

For sure. But he was a heck of a player. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Young John Tortarella 

It just showed our PP was 0 for 8 .... some things never change ūüėā

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Indabuff said:

My God the picture quality is terrible.

I was gonna say, it's perfect. It gives me the warm and fuzzies.

  • Thanks (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pretty incredible hearing these names.

2 minutes ago, PASabreFan said:

I was gonna say, it's perfect. It gives me the warm and fuzzies.

It looks like Tecmo Bowl but I get the nostalgia.  For some reason it looks more "real".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Indabuff said:

Pretty incredible hearing these names.

It looks like Tecmo Bowl but I get the nostalgia.  For some reason it looks more "real".

I can't put my finger on it, except it must be a generational thing. Some people will tell you music sounds better on whatever gizmo they had when they were young.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Should Hannan's goal have counted? Presley was solidly in the crease. I can't find the language of the original crease rule. Maybe it was liberal at first before getting tightened up to the disaster state of June 1999.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From an nhl.com timeline of rule changes:

1991-92: Goal disallowed if puck enters net while a player of the attacking team is standing on the goal crease line, is in the goal crease or places his stick in the goal crease.

Golly, it's almost like after playing for so many hours, they just let the Sabres have it so they could all go home.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, PASabreFan said:

From an nhl.com timeline of rule changes:

1991-92: Goal disallowed if puck enters net while a player of the attacking team is standing on the goal crease line, is in the goal crease or places his stick in the goal crease.

Golly, it's almost like after playing for so many hours, they just let the Sabres have it so they could all go home.

@Brett-Hull lol 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, PASabreFan said:

From an nhl.com timeline of rule changes:

1991-92: Goal disallowed if puck enters net while a player of the attacking team is standing on the goal crease line, is in the goal crease or places his stick in the goal crease.

Golly, it's almost like after playing for so many hours, they just let the Sabres have it so they could all go home.

NJ can have this one back if we can have the other one back.

  • Like (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, PASabreFan said:

From an nhl.com timeline of rule changes:

1991-92: Goal disallowed if puck enters net while a player of the attacking team is standing on the goal crease line, is in the goal crease or places his stick in the goal crease.

Golly, it's almost like after playing for so many hours, they just let the Sabres have it so they could all go home.

Good catch and interesting take, but the reality of the situation wasn't nearly that interesting.

The rule as of '92-'93 was if a player standing in the crease (stick position was irrelevant) prior to the puck entering the crease on a play that results in a goal, then the goal should be disallowed.  But, there was a HUGE unwritten caveat with that though which was followed by refs leaguewide, in that, although the rule said a goal would be disallowed, unless the player in the crease actually interfered with the goalie then the referee would let the goal stand.  (Similarly to how one could lightly "waterski" behind a guy he was checking without getting called for hooking nor interference.)

So, by the letter of the law, the goal shouldn't have stood; but that goal would have stood at any point that year (and for at least 1 before and several after) whether in the regular season or playoffs and whether in the home rink or the visitor's rink.  There was a reason the goal didn't create a controversy; it wasn't controversial.

BUT ... The rest of the story being that because the league didn't enforce the rule as written back in '92, by the late '90's, even "light" bumping of the goalie was tending to get ignored allowing goals to stand, which resulted in the "zero tolerance" interpretation of the rule for '98 that if a player was in any way shape or form in the goal crease before the puck was there then the result would be no valid goal.  (And we all know the rest of the rest of THAT story.)

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Another rules thing: there was a situation in the OT where Stevens closed his hands on the puck in the crease and it was just a penalty. I have always thought doing that was a penalty shot, not a penalty (The most notable example being game 5 of Isles-Panthers in 2016 where in OT an Isles player got called for it and a penalty shot was awarded but Greiss (Who along with *Redacted* were the reason the Isles won the series) saved it). Was the rule changed since 1994?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, sabremike said:

Another rules thing: there was a situation in the OT where Stevens closed his hands on the puck in the crease and it was just a penalty. I have always thought doing that was a penalty shot, not a penalty (The most notable example being game 5 of Isles-Panthers in 2016 where in OT an Isles player got called for it and a penalty shot was awarded but Greiss (Who along with *Redacted* were the reason the Isles won the series) saved it). Was the rule changed since 1994?

Pretty sure the refs claimed he didn't "grab" the puck while it was in the crease, but merely brushed it with is glove while it was there.  So, just another instance of finding a way to not enforce a rule as written.  (Old time hockey, eh?)

IIRC, he got the 2 minutes for delay of game for grabbing it and refusing to release it.

  • Like (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...