First the puck in the netting in Columbus, then Bishop's injury today. Both of these should not have counted, but were "not reviewable plays". Do you agree with me these should be reviewable?

Wow, I just looked at that STL goal again and earlier on the play Seguin got high-sticked and there was no call. NHL needs to change something.

Ben Bishop is one of my favourite goalies. And I want Dallas to win the series. But why should that goal not have counted? Dallas never gained possession. And Bishop wasn't hurt badly enough to leave the ice. If you expect a whistle there its going to lead to goalies playing possum if they lose the puck. Or if the numbers don't help them.

The officiating this post season has not been great. But i don't think is was one of those bad calls.

If the goalie is injured, play is almost always stopped.

"When a player is injured and is unable to continue play or go to his bench, play shall be stopped immediately unless the opposing team is in possession of the puck, in which case play shall not be stopped until a change of possession has
occurred."

If its a 50/50 puck or the defending team grabs it then play gets stopped. Steen had thank puck straight away, Dallas never got close. The right call was made. It sucks for Dallas but thats the rule.

Either way, the rule should be changed for goalies at least IMO. It's tricky with Bishop though because he's known to dive. Either way, the refs missed a call against STL earlier in the play on a high stick.

Here's what former NHL ref Kerry Fraser had to say about it:

Stian..I know the rule that quoted very well. Typically applied to a skater. A goalie is provided some extra measures of protection. The point you, & obviously NBC is missing that in the case of “serious” injury play can be stopped immediately. Common sense application on goalie! https://t.co/X7N60hTw4m

— Kerry Fraser (@kfraserthecall) May 5, 2019

Even though Bishop has a history of diving, I don't see how that's a dive. Did you see that shot by Parayko?

The NHL is planning on possibly making it so that if the goalie loses a skate blade the play will be stopped. I don't see how an injury is any different. It's probably easier for a goalie to play without a skate blade in one skate than it is to play injured. And you want to let the other team shoot a puck toward an injured goalie anyway?

Keep in mind the ref was ready to blow the whistle. Seems like he may have been waiting to see if Bishop got up and was about to blow the whistle if he stayed down on the ice but it was too late. Then there's the discussion about "intent to blow the whistle". He had the whistle ready and then St. Louis scored and he called it a goal.

The officials are having a hard enough time calling rules that exist. Should the rule be different? Maybe. But you cant expect them to call a game on what the rules should be.

Also, how serious is a serious injury? Bishop didnt leave the ice as a result of the injury. He played on then got pulled. As for being ready to blow the whistle. The red was obviously wait for dallas to touch the puck so he could blow the whistle, like the rule says, much like theu would on a delayed penalty.

But how do you know if the Goalie is actually injured? Bishop did stay in the game until the 4th goal was scored. It's a judgement call. Otherwise, a player could exaggerate an injury in order to have the play stopped.

I'm not saying they should make their own rules. IMO the rule should be different, but I agree the refs need to call by the rules. That's their job. What Kerry Fraser is saying is that the goalie is an exception. The rule doesn't explain enough. What does a "serious" injury mean? How serious is serious? And does it mean a bad injury or if the ref believes it isn't a fake injury?

I know Bishop is known for diving, but that didn't look like a dive. I mean, the goalie is down on the ice and there's nothing he could do. Why just let St. Louis score? That makes 0 sense. And also, the refs missed a call earlier that should have been called against the Blues, and it was ON THE SAME PLAY. Nobody's even talking about it because everyone's debating whether there should have been a whistle or not when Bishop was hurt.

Like i said above. The Officials have not been good this postseason. They have missed heaps and made several calls that werent there (just ask Vegas). But as the rules stand right now the bishop call was correct.

So, why do they almost always blow the whistle when the goalie is injured? The rules aren't clear enough.

Because the attacking team has possession or the goalies helmet has come off. I dont like the rule but if you read it its actually pretty clear. There is a certain amount of umpire disgression though. But its like that with a number of rules.

What is a "serious" injury? I'll show you some examples of goalie injuries with a whistle:

All three goalies left the ice. Bishop (for the stars) took a few moments but stayed in the game. Can goalies just go down to get a whistle?

No, but even though Bishop appears to be fine, he still couldn't make the save. It's almost like goalie interference. I mean, STL didn't interfere with him but he still couldn't make the save. If they think he's faking it, he can get called for embellishment.

Call for embellishment wouldve been a delayed call. The Blues scored and never lost possession. Same result.

Im betting on Dallas this series and I love Bishop. But Dallas didnt lose this game on that "missed call" they lost the game in failing to capitalize thought despite all their puck possession thought the second half of the first period and almost the entire second period. Officiating in this post season has been poor. At times it has cost teams games. But you can pin that game on that call

It (most likely) didn't really change the game. If that goal hadn't counted it would have been 3-1 STL most likely. However, what's the difference between this play and the others?

Bishop stayed in the game. The puck didnt hit him in the head. And as for the other Bishop play it wasnt blown dead until it left the zone.

1) He didn't really stay in the game. I mean, he did, but he then left 30 seconds later.
2) How does that have anything to do with this? There was no way he could make the save unless it was shot right at him!

1) he stayed in the game until he allowed another goal and was then pulled
2) which part?
2a) if a goalie is struck in the head and dazed its a different story. Contact to the head is always looked at differently.
2b) when he hurt his leg the play wasnt stopped until Tampa had possession/Puck left the zone. So its not really supporting your cause.

What I'm saying is that even if he wasn't "injured" he was hurt enough that he couldn't make the save.

And that's unfortunate. But as the rule states unless its a serious injury play doesnt stop. So... If it were a reviewable play, the goal would have stood.

Look what Kerry Fraser said.

Yeah. I saw your quote. Bishop didnt leave the game though so how serious was the injury? He has a history of hamming it up too. So his reputation cost him aswell.

I say again. I love Bishop. But that call was the right call.