Alexei Ponikarovsky's Penalty Shot Whiped Out by Sergei Gonchar's Goal - Jan 9th 2010 (HD)

[CactusJackFan]

The infraction existed because penalties can be called after a play. It is dead time because the clock has been turned back so everything that happened is now considered the same time as between plays etc. I think. . .

[camo771]

poni is unreal

[TheBobsmithers]

Burn!

[donteatthefishsticks]

@razorslice17 So if some Leaf decided to violently check some Penguin's head into the boards, that shouldn't be a penalty either? Penalties never go away when the clock is run back, because the whole thing is considered to have been dead time and you can still take penalties during dead time.

[StFidjnr]

this is one of the things that drives a GM nuts.

[donteatthefishsticks]

@856744 You are correct. You cannot score during dead time obviously, but you can take penalties. Penalties are one thing that is never erased when the clock is rewound, for obvious reasons.

[prampeet]

does no one here know the word 'have'??? its should have!! not should of!!

[sabrejacker]

@prampeet i know i hate when people dont know how to spell or dont know what word to use

[camlovestheleafs]

So Gonchar gets a goal and a penalty on the same play?

Confusing, yes?

[PittsburghArab]

once the goal was scored everything that happened afterward should not matter. penguins should not have gotten a penalty

[PCJ27imagination]

@PittsburghArab its very hard to say.. Cause the referee didn't give any signals and so, both teams thought the play continued with Gonchar giving a penalty...I don't think this call ever happened. So its really hard to say. I think the Ref did well with such a limited time but this isn't really ref, nor the teams fault. More like, the Leagues fault for not being prepared

[PittsburghArab]

@PCJ27imagination i agree it was a weird situation but imagine if they knew it was a goal immediately, play would have been stopped and thats it, every other time ive seen something like this everything after the goal doesn't count. ive even seen a goal scored but it still didnt count. i dont understand how the refs can allow what happened after the goal count and then go from a penalty shot call to just a hooking penalty? makes no sense to decide on, o well i just hope it doesnt happen again

[PenFan444]

@PittsburghArab i agree!

[shanimal47]

I think the refs actually sorted this out very well and very fairly.

[kieliobow]

@shanimal47 I disagree. Either they give Pitts the goal and wind the clock back to that point, giving Toronto nothing...OR, Pitts' goal is called void due to the refs resuming play and give Toronto the penalty shot. You can't have both.

The fact they gave Pitts a penalty means the play after the goal was not void, and so the clock should have never been set back. The call that was made is very contradictory.

[carlypiglet]

HA! The guy behind the glass at 3:33

[ricculus]

Dont really understand the penalty either. Play would have stopped after the goal. LGP!!

[lawrencetimmons94]

I seriously thought it was a fake mustache at 0:26.

[WA3L0SH]

and now Ponikarovsky is a Penguin so its all good...lookin back Im sure he's happy this happen

[reportcardtime]

@WA3L0SH and now hes with the LA Kings so it's all good... lokin back Im sure he's happy this happened

[luisad]

It makes sense that Gonchar scored, that's clear and you can't have two goals in the same stoppage, but its kinda weird that the leafs get a penalty, just doesn't make sense

[bcheaven]

Similar things have happened before. in the Stanley cup finals in 94 game 6 it was 3-1 Vancouver w/ a couple mins left when they took a shot that crossed the line without anyone seeing and the Rangers came back the other way to score and make it 3-2. after review they took the goal away from the rangers and made it 4-1 Canucks

[Chaotic8]

Looks as though this rule should be reviewed and altered. Gonchar's goal was clearly in, although that should not take away from the fact that a penalty shot should have been awarded on the other end.

[Rehtomflow]

@Chaotic8 No.. If the play was whistled down after the goal like it was supposed to, Ponikarovsky would have not had a breakaway or a penalty shot.

[Chaotic8]

@Rehtomflow; Naturally that would be the case, however it was not.

[Rehtomflow]

Yes.. Because the ref didn't see the puck going in. Off course the penalty shot should be called off, after review, the play was dead. That's what these video reviews are for.

[okpapereat]

@Chaotic8 No the rule books make sense, first of all you cant have 2 goals scored in one stopage this eliminates the penalty shot since there would be a possiblity of 2 goals. Once the play is dead by a goal only 1 can be scored understand?

[Ryan120420]

3 mins later Gonchar adds insult to injury and makes it 3-1 Pittsburgh.

LOL!

[meds613]

If it's any consolation to leaf fans - that shouldn't of been a penalty shot anyway. Move on.

[judopuns]

Actually, it should've, since hooking/maybe a little slashing to the ARM of the shooter could be considered hindering his ability to shoot

[moggydave]

Yeh cos if a team was playing and waiting for a review in which they though they'd scored, if penalties weren't accounted for they could get away with anything - what if after the shot had been taken a Penguins player had injured a Leaf in a check for behind? It's to stop people taking liberties. Same goes for the hooking penalty, but then if a penalty shot were scored, that'd be two goals at the same exact time - the rules won't allow that. Its a one-in-a-million situation - fairest outcome imo

[Greg676]

This play was a disgrace to hockey. I turned the game off at this point and put on the Toronto Rock game!

[boygenius88]

Wow what a confusing set of events. Growing up as a basketball fan, I've seen several instances of both teams scoring at the same time (time in this context being the time on the clock), but I've never seen anything like this before.

I hate the Pens, but I can't fathom to wonder why Gonchar was sent to the box if his penalty occurred after the goal was technically scored.

[tatzka90]

It says in rules, that if other team will get a goal during next whistle, player still shouldn't take penalty. I think it kinda makes sense