The Telegraph Two of the surprise packages of this clay-court season have been British – initially Dan Evans, who made a deep run in Monte Carlo, and more lately Cameron Norrie, who played his second final in three weeks on Sunday. Unfortunately, Norrie wasn’t able to land a maiden ATP title in Lyon. But then he was up against Stefanos Tsitsipas, who has been the dominant force of 2021 outside the slams, and now stands at No 1 in the table of most rankings points gained since January 1. Nevertheless, it had been a hugely creditable effort for Norrie to go this far, especially when you consider that he took out top seed Dominic Thiem on Thursday, and then trounced big-hitting Russian Karen Khachanov in Saturday’s semi-final, losing only two games in the process. Norrie has come to clay late in his career, but it feels like this is developing into his favourite surface. He has one of the heaviest left-handed forehands in the game, loaded with top-spin, and uses it like a miniature version of Rafael Nadal. The result has been a tally of 14 wins and only four losses since he began his European clay-court swing in Barcelona. So while the French Open, which starts next Sunday, has traditionally been a graveyard of British hopes, there are reasons to hope that this year’s event could deliver some more positive results. Norrie’s previous final in Estoril had been a nervewracking affair which he eventually lost on a deciding-set tie-break to the more experienced Spaniard Albert Ramos-Vinolas. Sunday was more straightforward for Tsitsipas, who needed only 69 minutes to hammer home a 6-3, 6-3 victory. It was Tsitsipas’ second title of the clay-court sequence, after he won Monte Carlo in mid-April, taking out Evans in the semi-final along the way. He has become a serious contender to upset the establishment – specifically Nadal and Novak Djokovic – at Roland Garros over the next few weeks. “I felt in good shape from the beginning of the tournament,” said Tsitsipas afterwards. “I am proud of today’s match, I knew it would be a difficult one against Cameron, who has been showing great tennis this week. He has been winning against good players and showing what the left hand can do on clay. “It was not an easy match today. I had to handle the nerves and I am proud of my performance and the way I stayed focused towards my goal.” On this year’s results, meanwhile, both Evans and Norrie stand among the world’s 20 most successful men. Evans is at No 16 and Norrie No 14. The next challenge for them both is to convert that ATP Tour form into a deep run at a major.<doc-sep>The Leafs outplayed the Bruins in all aspects of the game tonight, so it’s a little surprising that Game 5 came down late in the third period. Auston Matthews broke the deadlock with a wicked one-timer with just under 9 minutes to go. (Link if you can’t see the highlight.) Immediately after the goal, Rask turned around and approached the officials, signaling that he was bumped by Zach Hyman in front. The Bruins would challenge it, and after a fairly lengthy review, the league upheld the call on the ice: good goal. Was it the right call? It’s hard to say. It seems like goalie interference is an ever-evolving rule. Sometimes it’s a penalty. Sometimes it’s no goal. Sometimes it’s a goal. Who knows? The overhead angle didn’t look too bad, but this angle makes it look worse: Leafs take a 1-0 lead from Auston Matthews’ goal. Was review for goalie interference pic.twitter.com/mGHAfAjJLI — Pete Blackburn (@PeteBlackburn) April 20, 2019 You could certainly make the argument that Rask wasn’t going to get over there regardless, but that’s not really how goalie interference is supposed to work. A former goalie agreed with that assessment: Wow. I guess they must have felt Rask wasn’t gonna be able to come across but to me it doesn’t matter, contact was made and in my opinion should’ve been overturned. — Martin Biron (@martybiron43) April 20, 2019 Annnnnnnd another ex-goalie chimed in: Omg didn’t see it live. Total interference — Corey Hirsch (@CoreyHirsch) April 20, 2019 And a current goalie! Once again the NHL goalie interference review is flawed. Someone that’s played the game in the blue paint should be in the situation room. Games are being lost in the playoffs and it’s not right. #inconsistent https://t.co/1DmPfnZC9K — Cam Talbot (@ctalbot33) April 20, 2019 You know it’s bad when even Canadiens fans are on board: Huge win for the Toronto Situation Room to put the Bruins on the brink of elimination. pic.twitter.com/XHaGW5EeHm — The Habs Forum (@TheHabsForum) April 20, 2019 Per a communication from the league, this is the logic: “If a review is not conclusive and/or there is any doubt whatsoever as to whether the call on the ice was correct, the original call on the ice will be confirmed.” Whatever you say, NHL. The call changed the tune of Leafs fans, who spent the earlier portion of the game complaining that the refs were bad and were biased; after this call, the refs were fair and good and wise. That’s the way it goes! What do you think?<doc-sep>Tuukka Rask will always have his detractors in this town. But if anyone holds the goaltender responsible for Friday’s Bruins’ 2-1 loss to the Toronto Maple Leafs in the pivotal Game 5 at the Garden, then he/she’s got a serious grudge. With the players in front of him getting outplayed by what has been so far a hungrier, perhaps simply better Leafs’ team, Rask did all he could to keep his team in the game. It was scoreless after two periods, but with 8:27 left in regulation, Toronto finally broke through the stalemate on a controversial goal. Related Articles Bruins slow out of the gate in Game 5 loss Bruins lost Game 5 before Maple Leafs scored a goal Auston Matthews lifts Leafs past Bruins With the players bunched up in front of Rask, Jake Muzzin had plenty of real estate in front of him to skate the puck down into a dangerous area. He eventually made a nice dish to his right for Auston Matthews on a backdoor play and Matthews scored into a wide open net. And it was wide open for a reason. As the pass was on its way, Zach Hyman pushed off Charlie McAvoy in front of him and then backed into Rask, clearly making contact with the goaltender. After the puck went in, Rask immediately argued that Hyman interfered with him. Referees Eric Furlatt and Dan O’Halloran went to the tablet and, after a lengthy review and consultation with the situation room in Toronto, the play was ruled inconclusive, meaning the call on the ice – a goal – would be upheld. The call may have decided the B’s season. If Rask was angry about the decision, he addressed it with aplomb after the game. He seemed to think the call could have gone either way. “I just felt that there was contact so I kind of went after the ref there and let him know that there was contact. They looked at it, so it’s a goal,” said Rask. “I saw (Muzzin) and as soon as he passed it (Hyman) bumped in my head and that was it. I trust that they get them right.” He did think he would have had a chance to make the save had contact not been made. “I would have gotten a push because I saw the pass going that way but it just kind of distracted me,” said Rask. “It wasn’t major contact but it happened so quick, you don’t want to start selling it. I guess if I fell on my ass there, it might have been a different story.” Coach Bruce Cassidy was a lot more adamant that the goal should have come off the board. “Well, clearly he interferes with Tuukka. It goes to Toronto and they have to make a decision. I just hope they don’t predict whether they thought the goalie could make the save, get across in time. It’s either interference or its not,” said Cassidy. “We discussed it. We have a supervisor that follows the series around and both coaches voice if there’s something that (bothers them). I think the officiating’s been very good in this series. There were no issues up in Toronto. There was a play in the third period the other night when Hyman cross-checked (Zdeno Chara) from behind in a 5-4 game (in Game 4) in front of our net to create space. There’s a lot of net-front battles up there, especially in the last 10 minutes, so we talked about that, that it’s getting tight to the goaltender. We put our opinion out and sometimes they’ll let the refereesknow the temperature of the series, sometimes they won’t. I don’t know if they did or not, but sure enough that play comes out. (Hyman) pushes off Charlie then backes into Tuukka. From my viewpoint, it certainly looked like goaltender inteference. The call didn’t go our way. It’s 1-0 with eight minutes to go. We have time to get ourselves back in the game. Unfortunately we weren’t able to do that.” Rask was excellent, stopping 25 pucks, and it appeared he had just saved the B’s bacon when they were whistled for a too many men penalty with 7:14 gone in the third, making several big stops on the kill. But he wasn’t able to steal this one. “Just a tough bounce. Those happen and you just have to battle through it,” said Rask. With the B’s pushing for the equalizer, they gave up an odd-man rush and Rask could not stop the open Kasperi Kapanen’s shot after hitting a rut in the ice, said Rask. The B’s got one back with the goalie pulled, but the Matthews goal was the one that changed the game. Now the B’s are down to their last out. They have to win on Sunday in Toronto to keep their season alive and force a Game 7. “We just have to play a solid road game. We know how to do that,” said Rask. “And maybe score one or two more goals than they do. I think if we play our game, play as well as we can then the results, whatever happens, happens and we can live with it.”<doc-sep>
The Maple Leafs are up 3-2 in their first-round Stanley Cup playoff series with the Bruins after a 2-1 win Friday night. Auston Matthews' fourth goal of the postseason was the difference. Matthews' goal was not without controversy, however, as the marker was reviewed for potential goaltender interference. Toronto forward Zach Hyman made contact with Boston netminder Tuukka Rask before Jake Muzzin fed Matthews for the score. "I felt contact, so I went after the ref there and let him know there was contact," Rask told reporters postgame. "They looked at it so it’s a goal. I saw him, he had the puck — as soon as he passed it, it kind of like bumped my head. But I trust them to get it right." While Rask took a subdued approach in addressing the play, several professional goalies were more critical of the call. Philadelphia Flyers netminder Cam Talbot was the most prominent name to speak out, calling the review process for interference "flawed." Once again the NHL goalie interference review is flawed. Someone that’s played the game in the blue paint should be in the situation room. Games are being lost in the playoffs and it’s not right. #inconsistent https://t.co/1DmPfnZC9K — Cam Talbot (@ctalbot33) April 20, 2019 Martin Biron, who was an NHL goalie for 16 years and is now an analyst for MSG Networks, believed the goal should have been overturned. Wow. I guess they must have felt Rask wasn’t gonna be able to come across but to me it doesn’t matter, contact was made and in my opinion should’ve been overturned. — Martin Biron (@martybiron43) April 20, 2019 Six-year NHL veteran Mike McKenna, who suited up for the Flyers and Ottawa Senators during the regular season, was much more blunt. That was goalie interference in the BOS / TOR game. Period. — Mike McKenna (@MikeMcKenna56) April 20, 2019 If somebody in the NHL league office takes up Talbot on his suggestion, one goalie has already thrown her name in for consideration. Buffalo Beauts netminder and two-time Olympic gold medalist Shannon Szabados offered her services to review interference plays from the league's situation room. Offering my services to be the “someone that’s played the game in the blue paint” to be in the situation room to help review calls. @NHL get at me. RT for all the goalies that need some representation on goal reviews https://t.co/1c4NN5vVbR — Shannon Szabados (@ShannonSzabados) April 20, 2019 It did not even take an hour for another controversial interference call to surface. Johnny Gaudreau of the Calgary Flames had a goal rescinded after it was determined Sam Bennett made contact with Avalanche goalie Phillip Grubauer. While the NHL has a rule for dealing with such calls, it's clear the league needs a more consistent barometer to rate what is and is not considered interference.