GDT Game 1: 5/15/16 | 7:00PM CST | v Sharks | NBCSN/Y98

[flyingnote38]

lets see if I have this straight....Shaw didn't interfere with Elliott, but Berglund interfered with Jones?

[Portland Blues]

lets see if I have this straight....Shaw didn't interfere with Elliott, but Berglund interfered with Jones?

[glen a richter]

If it's an own goal, as was the case on Berglund's non goal, it should be assumed to be not interference. If the Shark (already forgot which one) didn't put it past Jones himself it's a non issue anyway. Something to be addressed in the offseason. Anything video shows to be an own goal should ve exempt from all other rules which would override it.

[Portland Blues]

If it's an own goal, as was the case on Berglund's non goal, it should be assumed to be not interference. If the Shark (already forgot which one) didn't put it past Jones himself it's a non issue anyway. Something to be addressed in the offseason. Anything video shows to be an own goal should ve exempt from all other rules which would override it.

Agreed. It was Vlasic that knocked it in. Should have been payback for Bergevin throwing it in our net years ago.

[abc789987]

It was pretty obvious goaltender interference. Stupid challenge. Although I don't understand the call on the ice. They said incidental contact, no goal... I would have thought that worked the other way...

[glen a richter]

If it's an own goal, as was the case on Berglund's non goal, it should be assumed to be not interference. If the Shark (already forgot which one) didn't put it past Jones himself it's a non issue anyway. Something to be addressed in the offseason. Anything video shows to be an own goal should ve exempt from all other rules which would override it.

Agreed. It was Vlasic that knocked it in. Should have been payback for Bergevin throwing it in our net years ago.

I guess if it hadn't been deemed interference and the goal counted, Vlasic would have been in a bit of a pickle?

/lame jokes.

[dmiles2186]

If I'm not mistaken, the Blues have had 3 goals overturned by review. Or I guess in this case the call on the ice was confirmed as no goal via challenge. Either way, the Blues have won all 3 of those games, which is kind of remarkable. Let's stop giving them a reason to take away our goals, though.

Tight game all around and outside that stormy 2nd period, the Blues played pretty well. I thought the response in the 3rd was great, they calmed the game down and just kept taking time off the clock with hardly any shots from the Sharks. Until the end, of course. This team has to do better about getting hemmed in when the other team has an empty net. Hitch talked about it in the postgame presser too. We've weathered the storm pretty well, up to this point, but we've gotta give Ells some help in that regard.

Speaking of Ells, what a ballsy performance. Sure, the posts helped him out some, but he was in control all night. Fantastic Game 1 performance. Keep it up.

[fargoblues]

It was pretty obvious goaltender interference. Stupid challenge. Although I don't understand the call on the ice. They said incidental contact, no goal... I would have thought that worked the other way...

incidental contact as opposed to contact that would have given Berglund a penalty for goaltender interference.

Either way, whatever. Blues win in spite of that crap. Major difference between this years team and recent squads.

[cprice12]

The fact that we won last night with how that game went, is impressive.
The Sharks should have won that game. They dominated the 2nd period, but we get the only goal in that period...a bad goal at that...awful goal to allow by Jones. And that was the difference.

Elliott is the man. Period.

First period was fine...3rd period was good...2nd period we got owned, but came out unscathed. That's a damn good sign...as long as we don't have too many more of those periods.

I'd like to see us play a much more complete game in game #2.

[goon attack]

On a side note... I find Kenny Albert's voice to be like nails on a chalkboard.

[gaijin]

The thing that stood out the most to me was that San Jose was winning all the puck battles- digging all the pucks out of the corners, getting (and maintaining) puck possession most of the game. Our faceoffs weren't great either. And when we did win one it would get whistled back for a do-over. If not for Elliott, this game ends very differently.

Postseason record for most goals disallowed?

[goon attack]

Re: the Berglund goal. Seems absolutely goalie interference to me.

Berglund made substantial contact with Jones before the puck was even able to be stopped... does it matter who touched the puck last?

If that goal is allowed to stand, does that mean players are now able to just ram into goalie whenever they wish?

[cprice12]

Re: the Berglund goal. Seems absolutely goalie interference to me.

Berglund made substantial contact with Jones before the puck was even able to be stopped... does it matter who touched the puck last?

If that goal is allowed to stand, does that mean players are now able to just ram into goalie whenever they wish?

When it happened live, I didn't even really celebrate the goal because I thought for sure Berglund interfered with Jones badly.

Then I saw the replay, and he didn't make as much contact as I thought...but it was still interference. It doesn't matter who hit the puck in...at least I don't think it does. Never had that come up before.

[ecbm]

I agree that the interference looked pretty obvious...but then again, so did Shaw's and that goal stood. So I was waiting to see how it went, thinking it could go either way. It shouldn't be so unclear. They've(still) got some work to do on this rule.

[fargoblues]

I agree that the interference looked pretty obvious...but then again, so did Shaw's and that goal stood. So I was waiting to see how it went, thinking it could go either way. It shouldn't be so unclear. They've(still) got some work to do on this rule.

This right here.

[fargoblues]

Look for more of this. DeBoer is using his pressers to play up the notion that the Blues are one of the most penalized teams in the league and the refs should "do their job"

https://twitter.com/cotsonika/status/732242644370370560

[Kreegz2]

If I'm not mistaken, the Blues have had 3 goals overturned by review. Or I guess in this case the call on the ice was confirmed as no goal via challenge. Either way, the Blues have won all 3 of those games, which is kind of remarkable. Let's stop giving them a reason to take away our goals, though.

We lost the Chicago game where Tarasenko had his goal called back because of Lehtera's skate and a few minutes later Shaw's goal was allowed to stand.

[StL Dan]

Big smile on my face this morning.

The dude in the office that always wears some type of Sharks jersey every day of every week has got nothing on me TODAY.

Let's Go BLUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUES.

[fargoblues]

[fargoblues]