Rule 67

[Laxsaur]

Re the first contested goal Friday night, Rule 67 states (in part)

ATTACKING TEAM FIRST TOUCH AFTER SHOT ON GOAL
- A crease violation occurs when an attacking player after
taking a shot on goal enters and then exits the crease and
is the first to touch the ball, not including after a touch
by the goalie.

Does this not perfectly describe what happened on what was ruled a valid goal? While one goal would not have changed the outcome, what could have been the psychological benefit to the Jax if the rule been applied properly? Poor officiating makes the league look rinky-dink.

[mtbf]

Well that is what the challenge flag is for if that happened

I also think rule 34 applies here

Rule 34: If it exists, there is porn of it. No exceptions.

In your case its the ref's are why we lost jackoff porn

[lax fan]

They did challenge the play but the refs got it wrong and should be sent back to school because that had to one of the easiest goals to over turn.

[StealthDragon]

I felt the refs totally blew that call when Sedgwick touched the ball after going through the crease and getting the ball.

BUT - I think the challenge can only look at if the goal is valid and maybe can't enforce the illegal first touching prior to the goal? In other words, you can only challenge the goal not any other part. That's the only thing I can think that happened. So once Sedgwick had the ball his goal was legal and that was all that could be challenged. But getting the ball in the first part should have been blown dead.

[silvanthalas]

Originally Posted by StealthDragon

BUT - I think the challenge can only look at if the goal is valid and maybe can't enforce the illegal first touching prior to the goal?

Well, the only thing you can challenge is crease violations, and that rule would qualify the challenge as such.

Just another terribly blown call by incompetent refs.

[laxinoregon]

Originally Posted by StealthDragon

I felt the refs totally blew that call when Sedgwick touched the ball after going through the crease and getting the ball.

BUT - I think the challenge can only look at if the goal is valid and maybe can't enforce the illegal first touching prior to the goal? In other words, you can only challenge the goal not any other part. That's the only thing I can think that happened. So once Sedgwick had the ball his goal was legal and that was all that could be challenged. But getting the ball in the first part should have been blown dead.

That is correct. All he is able to review is the goal itself not the preceeding events.

[Niknak]

Originally Posted by Laxsaur

Re the first contested goal Friday night, Rule 67 Poor officiating makes the league look rinky-dink.

It was Sutton's crew, are we really suprised they blew a call? I mean I hate to beat a dead horse , but really? Refs are going to misss calls, it happens, but it seems to be a certainty...