Ed Mulholland-US PRESSWIRE - Presswire
A look at each of the Devils' four disallowed goals from the 2011-2012 season. It's easier too look back and see them objectively months after they took their toll the season.
In the NHL, there are always a number of controversial goals that fans say should or shouldn't have counted. They go to Toronto to be reviewed, and the arena is either full of ecstatic or furious fans when the results come in. This year, the Devils had eight goals go under review. Some of the calls were turned over, while some stood with the referees' original call. It seems as though each season there is at least one or two non-goals that infuriate fans. Is it because we are only seeing what we want to see, or are we correct in disagreeing with the Toronto Situation Room? In this article I look into each of the four disallowed goals from the 2011-2012 season. Hopefully, after re-reviewing them months after the call was made and having sufficient time to get over the excitement and frustration, it will be easier to look at them objectively
This play was quite controversial for everyone watching. On November 26, 2011 with less than 5 seconds left in the game, the Islanders were leading 2-1 when Parise scored from a quick pass off the draw and a scrum in front of the net. This would have tied the game and sent it to overtime, but the goal was waved off due to a "distinct kicking motion." This was an especially frustrating call for Devils fans because the call on the ice was a goal. In order for a goal to be reversed, there must be clear evidence in the replay proving the referees wrong. What Parise said to Tom Gulitti of Fire & Ice pretty much explained most Devils fan opinions on the call.
"A tight game like that where we worked to get back into it and they make the wrong call. I just watched it and I'm sorry, but I can't agree with it. I knew it hit off my skate. I knew it hit off my stick too, but if that's a kicking motion, then I don't know."
This was an extremely frustrating moment for Devils fans. When watching the game, I truly thought it was a goal, and upon watching it again I still don't see enough evidence to turn over the call on the ice. To me, it seemed as though the puck deflected off of Parise's skate, he did not push it into the net with his leg. I wouldn't call his leg movement a "distinct kicking motion."
Devils vs. Senators - January 2, 2012
On January 2, 2012 the Devils were facing the Senators, yet again - this time in Ottawa. Zajac seemed to score with 5:24 left in the first period allowing the Devils to take the lead, but the call on the ice did not stand. After going to review, it was clear that the puck never crossed the line, and therefore the goal was recalled. The Devils went on to lose the game in overtime.
This is a clear no goal. The puck never crossed the line, and that is clear in watching the replay. The red arrow in the picture above shows the closest the puck gets to crossing completely. From other angles, it did look as though it was a goal, but the birds eye view proves it - no goal.
This was another somewhat controversial call against the Devils. On February 2, 2012 Kovalchuk shot on Canadiens' goalie, Carey Price on a shorthanded attempt followed up by Ponikarovsky. It seemed that Ponikarovsky got the puck passed Price, but there was no goal called on the ice. After going to review, the Situation Room could not conclusively say whether or not the puck crossed the line, so the call of no goal on the ice stood. Although there was no goal, the Devils managed to win the game 5-3.
I must admit, this no goal frustrated me. This is one of those plays in which the call on the ice stood because there was not enough evidence to change it. Whether or not the puck crossed the goal line can only be seen under the pads of Carey Price. If that puck actually did cross the line, only Carey Price knows.
The final goal review of the season came during Game 1 of the Stanley Cup Finals. The Devils were tied with the Kings in the third period 1-1 when there was a major scrum in front of the net, and the puck ended up in the back of it. There was no goal called on the ice because Parise pushed it in with his glove. It was a very disappointing but clear no goal. This play was considered a hand pass.
I was at this game live, and like the rest of the fans in the building, I was livid at the no goal call. After watching it here, it became obvious the call of no goal was correct. Parise clearly pushed the puck into the net with his glove, which is a no goal.
What were your thoughts of the Devils' non-goals that went to review this year? Were there any final decisions you disagreed with? Do you think there was enough evidence to turn over the goals that were originally called good on the ice? Looking back, did seeing some of these plays again change your mind from your original thought during the game? Sound off below!