Bayern Trupp » Norris did get out of the inning

In the Predators/Habs game Saturday night, Montreals second, go-ahead goal was ultimately disallowed after review (I believe the ref stated that after all four officials determined that the puck had not crossed the line). Now, correct me if Im wrong but I saw one official distinctly pointing at the net indicating a good goal but after an inconclusive review they overturned the goal. Shouldnt the ruling on the ice (good goal) stand after an inconclusive review? Why was this overturned? James Veaudry Pembroke, ON -- Hey Kerry, Youll get a lot of these, but why was the Montreal goal against Nashville Saturday night overturned? Eller puts the puck on net and the on ice ruling from the ref behind the net is a Montreal goal. After much delay, the same ref announces that after a review with all on ice officials, the ruling is the puck never crossed the goal line. How is this possible? Ive always believed that if the video review is inconclusive, which it obviously was, then the call on ice stands. How is the other ref from the blue line supposed to tell if a puck crosses the line? Let alone be able to overrule the ref inches away. The ref simply changed his mind after the play. Is that allowed? Sounds pretty shady to me. Thanks, Dave -- Hi Kerry! Last night I was bouncing out of my chair with excitement when the red light came on, Lars Eller celebrated and the referee pointed indicating a goal in the third period. Then suddenly the referees decided to review the play as there was question about whether the puck had actually crossed the line. After watching the replays myself, it was unclear whether the puck made it over the line or not because it was hidden under Rinnes body. Seeing this, I was all but sure that the goal had to stand, because from my understanding the referees needed undeniable evidence to over-turn an on-ice call. But that wasnt the case. The referee announced that "The four referees agree that the puck did not enter the net" which indicated to this viewer that, they too were unsure but had a chat about it, and I suppose used their judgment, to deicide the puck had never crossed the line. What I dont understand is how they can make this new judgment with inconclusive evidence? Moreover, how a referee can clearly call a goal a goal, and then change his opinion moments later? Could you clear up my confusion with the rules on this matter? Thanks! Rob -- To All Disappointed Habs Fans: Upon further information gathering from all vantage points on the ice by the officiating crew, including a seemingly definitive confirmation from the situation room video review, the referee on the goal line changed his initial quick reaction decision and correctly determined that the puck did not cross the goal line - no goal! At no time do we see the puck cross the goal line on this play. The official statement found on the Situation Room blog posting at NHL.com is as follows; “Video review determined that Montreal Canadiens forward Lars Ellers shot did not cross the goal line. No goal Montreal.” (See Situation Room review here. Having witnessed referee Chris Rooney point to the net to signal a goal I trust it is the referees announcement that is causing you confusion (“The call on the ice by the four officials that the puck did not cross the goal line and that is confirmed (by video review)…”) and not the correct final decision that was ultimately rendered. All confusion would have been eliminated had the announcement by the referee simply been; “Video review has confirmed that the puck did not cross the goal line, the initial call on the ice is overturned - no goal.” Let me explain the protocol and how the process most likely worked in this situation. In the event that video review returns an “inconclusive” verdict the referees are required to make a decision (communicated with a point into the net or washout signal) from their vantage point when it appears the puck has entered the net. Sometimes the “vantage point” a referee has in that moment is not always the best one. For this reason, the four officials on the ice are required to conference and provide input from their respective vantage points as an added ‘safety check. This is in addition to video review that takes place. Through the conference process considerable doubt must have been created in referee Rooneys mind and caused him to change his initial reaction to the play. The obvious answer is the referee needs to see the puck cross the line before pointing to the net. In real time other factors can complicate this decision. In fairness on this play, the referees approach to the net was from the opposite corner from behind the goal line. This route caused an obstructed view looking through the net and the back of Predators sprawled goalie Pekka Rinne. The refs focus was also split between a penalty that he signaled to David Legwand for cross-checking Eller just as the Montreal forward flipped the puck toward Rinne. With Rinnes body position sprawled deep into the net and across the goal line, Rooneys gut reaction and instinct told him the puck had crossed the line from his vantage point. As required, the ref made his initial decision but once a consultation took place with the other crew members Rooney correctly changed his opinion on the play. It would have been less confusing and more efficient had the ref not communicated the result of the Officiating Crews ‘internal process that caused him to change his initial decision on the play. In the end the right decision was rendered. Sometimes the less said the better! Minnesota Twins Shirts . -- At the beginning of training camp, Andrew Bogut set a goal to play all 82 regular-season games and regain his place among the NBAs best centres. Frank Viola Twins Jersey . - Skiing far more aggressively than in her season debut a day earlier, Lindsey Vonn was in provisional 10th place after the first 45 skiers in a World Cup downhill on Saturday. https://www.cheaptwins.com/1052t-marwin-...rsey-twins.html. -- Kole Calhoun homered and drove in three runs, Albert Pujols also went deep and the Los Angeles Angels beat the Chicago White Sox 8-4 Friday night. Ryan LaMarre Jersey . LOUIS -- When Braves second baseman Tyler Pastornicky backpedaled into shallow right field to catch the popup and Jason Heyward didnt arrive fast enough to take charge, Kolten Wong got the green light. Cody Stashak Twins Jersey .J. -- Kyle Palmieri thrilled his personal rooting section with an overtime winner that sent the Anaheim Ducks to their seventh straight win.BOSTON – Colby Rasmus doesnt stand to benefit from Melky Cabreras fractured right pinky finger, a season-ending injury suffered in Friday nights loss to the Red Sox. Kevin Pillar took Cabreras spot in Saturdays lineup, playing left field and hitting seventh. Anthony Gose was in centre field, batting ninth. “Thats the plan. We want to see what these guys are,” said manager John Gibbons. “Im not saying this is the way its going to be, but there could be a scenario next year where thats your left and centre fielders. Who knows what happens in the offseason? Im not foretelling anything.” Rasmus isnt in the teams plans. Thats not foretelling. Its fact. “Colbys still going to play,” said Gibbons. “Well come up against some guys he matches up well with and hell definitely get some playing time. The whole idea was we need to find out about these guys. Its not like they came out of nowhere. These guys have been pretty good for us. Theyve helped us win a lot of games this year when weve been really strong.” Whats more complicated, impossible at this point, is to predict whether Cabreras tenure in Toronto will extend to a second contract. Cabrera, in brief and laboured English, offered, “I stay in Toronto” in a post-game media scrum on Friday night. Dont take that for a guarantee. There is a lost in translation factor to that quote. Cabrera will go where the term and money are highest. The Blue Jays, at least, should qualify Cabrera. Itd cost the club about $15-million on a one-year term if Cabrera were to accept. If he doesnt, the Jays get a compensatory first-round draft pick. The club could also try to work out a multi-year deal with Cabrera. Anything more than two or three years carries risk with a player whos had a performance eenhancing drug suspension and a benign tumour removed from his back within the last 24 months.dddddddddddd Cabreras season ends with 139 games played and a slash line of .301/.351/.458 (.808 OPS). Cabreras 171 led the team at the time of his injury; his 16 home runs were the second-highest total of his career (18 with Kansas City in 2011). NORRIS vs. BIG PAPI Players remember their major league debuts. Daniel Norris is no different - in fact, his may be more memorable than most. The 21-year-old left-hander came in to Friday nights game in the seventh inning. With his Blue Jays up 4-3, the Red Sox had a runner on second base and two outs for David Ortiz. “I know this sounds weird, but for a minute I kind of had to put my debut aside because there was a runner on second in the seventh inning of a 4-3 game and I was like I cant let this guy score,” said Norris. “I was definitely mindful of this is my first appearance, this is pretty crazy, but at the same time it was like, equally, I wanted to get out of that inning for the guys.” Norris did get out of the inning. He buckled Ortizs knees with a first pitch curveball, a called strike. After falling behind 3-1, Norris threw a fastball for a foul ball and then, on the full count, froze Ortiz with another curveball. “First 3-2 curveball Ive thrown all year, but I wasnt about to shake (Dioner Navarro) off,” said Norris. Norris becomes the second Blue Jays left-hander to make his big league debut against Ortiz this season. Rob Rasmussen did the same in May. He retired Ortiz on a ground ball. “For the previous three days, I had been envisioning facing him,” said Norris. “Its kind of weird that it ended up that way but I knew there was a possibility Id have to face him.” ' ' '