Canadiens fall victim to review twice against Rangers

Watch as the Montreal Canadiens have two goals disallowed against the New York Rangers.

[nottherealjaymckee]

I'm a Rangers fan but that second goal should've counted

[mitchellmcmanus]

My biased view of the first one is that shaw kicked it into lunquist who had possession of for a second before knocking it in his own net

[habsc]

Shaw’s goal: kicked into Lundqvist pad, he puts it in himself. Voiding the kick. Pacioretty goal: Pushed in, Hank with the flop of the century, weak tap, puck already going in before contact. Look at the goal where Price got dragged out of the net by a rangers player last year and that wasn’t goalie interference.

[Tommmmmmy]

Rip Montreal at least you aren't anywhere near as bad as the jets. I demand a trade

[willrobinson]

Even though I'm a Leaf fan, I think the Habs got jobbed on the first one. Shaw didn't kick it at the net, he kicked it out in front of it. The puck was behind the goal line when he kicked it. Goalie put it in his own net. The second one could go either way. Lundqvist was bumped, but not very hard. Nice sell. Probably should have counted.

[adamxxx]

1st goal - obvious kick, 100% disallowed

2nd goal - Hab was pushed, BUT made ZERO effort into avoiding contact with the goalie. I'm ok with it being disallowed.

[megashot]

once again the refs manage to screw up another game where the canadiens played better. Yes, they might have not had as much kick as the first period but there offence was still going. Having two goals called back could change the momentum of the whole game and that's what happened. The Rangers couldn't have got any more luck than this.

[AEMoreira]

The first one was a good call. The second one was not.

[christinecheverie]

To Me lundqvist could have had a chance to save that goal if Pacioretty wasn't pushed into him

[Fvu]

Not 100% sure about the first one, but the second was a goal. Im not an expert so this is just my opinion.

[hckeymodz]

Did Shaw really think he could get away with a goal there. First poking at lundqvist glove after he covers it and then kicks it

[dominikszkoda]

The first one was the right call and the second was a toss up

[bigmak]

Lol so they call the first one a goal after he kicked it and banked it in off of another player but in the 2015 playoffs when the stars player hackey sack kicked the puck over the net and off of dubnyks back, that's a goal?

[MrMikeyboy]

wow that was bullshit and I'm a leafs fan. First one is questionable but the second one was a goal

[Christoph]

Honestly what is goalie interference? Like I guess just shove you opponent into your goalie and it's an automatic no goal apparently. Just make sure they don't lay on top of him, then it's a good goal

[vincentlaforest]

The trick in today's hockey: Push the forward in your goalie. Then, every shot going in the net is illegal because the goalie was "bumped" by his Defensmen. During that time, players are being cross-checked in the mouth, clearly bleeding, but no penalties. GREAT JOB NHL.

[bananakin]

First one is fair. But second one was bull Pacioretty was pushed

[cwegs]

I think they were good calls first goal was kicked in and second goal even if it wasn't goalie interference it was offside

[cloudsopowera]

Habs win the 1st overall pick of the 2018 NHL by having the biggest chance at winning it....oh wait the fans and French media will go nuts about missing the playoffs

[stefanopasqualeminichiello]

Second was a goal no reason to call it off