Not disputing win by Army ... they outplayed MD in many facets of the game. But Terps had two goals disallowed tonight ... #24 shot and scored but then slid down to stop momentum and slid into the crease well after the goal scored? Why was that disallowed? Announcers didn't seem sure either ... stating the call as "bizarre". Was it possibly because he went inside the arc within the crease? Later an Army player scored and then ran through the crease from momentum after the shot and all good ... a goal. Just confused ...
The other goal, our player was clearly pushed/cross-checked into the goal, scored and landed on the goalie. No goal ... supposedly invoking a seldom called rule that if the refs believed you were going to end up in the crease even if not pushed, then the goal is disallowed. Certainly leaves it open to great interpretation by the refs. BS in my book. And to top it off, because of landing on the goalie, we were called for a penalty and went man down - can't remember if Army scored or not - but a huge swing play.
Would love more clarity around either of these calls.
Mark
The other goal, our player was clearly pushed/cross-checked into the goal, scored and landed on the goalie. No goal ... supposedly invoking a seldom called rule that if the refs believed you were going to end up in the crease even if not pushed, then the goal is disallowed. Certainly leaves it open to great interpretation by the refs. BS in my book. And to top it off, because of landing on the goalie, we were called for a penalty and went man down - can't remember if Army scored or not - but a huge swing play.
Would love more clarity around either of these calls.
Mark
Last edited:
