22 replies to this topic

[AceInTheSleeve]

I was just on NHL.com checking up on stats when I noticed they have a reel of great shootout dekes from this season. After watching Z and Huds pull the forsberg, I see a lame ass video of patrick kane coming nearly to a complete stop on a shootout and proceeding to dangle the f*** out of backstrom while gliding mere inches forward.

This is the video:


My question is should this goal count?

I thought the rule was that the puck has to be in constant forward motion the entire time.
The way I see it kane makes several lateral and backward dekes with the puck, and while that would be fine if he was still carrying forward momentum, kane has barely any momentum. By definition of the rule I believe that the puck ceases to move forward during the entire dangle infront of backstrom.

There is a few other lame shootout moves including the 'spin-o-rama' that I also believe should not count by definition of the rule.

[evilzyme]

The current rule says the puck cannot come to a complete stop, they're currently in talks trying to make sense of better ruling when it comes to shootouts. The biggest argument was Burrows spin o rama goal earlier, when he basically just runs the goalie over and backhands on the finish of the spin o rama. The new rule propositions are that either they rule it once the player comes to a complete stop, or that they want a shot clock (10 seconds was the example). The shot clock is to favor the goalie because the skater would likely not know their time and rush the net in hopes of never reaching the end to the shot clock, while it may also cause the skills competition to last 82 games long.

[Carman]

Copy/Paste of official rules, bolded the important parts I believe.

24.2 Procedure - The Referee shall ask to have announced over the public address system the name of the player designated by him or selected by the team entitled to take the shot (as appropriate). He shall then place the puck on the center face-off spot and the player taking the shot will, on the instruction of the Referee (by blowing his whistle), play the puck from there and shall attempt to score on the goalkeeper. The puck must be kept in motion towards the opponent’s goal line and once it is shot, the play shall be considered complete. No goal can be scored on a rebound of any kind (an exception being the puck off the goal post or crossbar, then the goalkeeper and then directly into the goal), and any time the puck crosses the goal line or comes to a complete stop, the shot shall be considered complete.

The lacrosse-like move whereby the puck is picked up on the blade of the stick and “whipped” into the net shall be permitted provided the puck is not raised above the height of the shoulders at any time and when released, is not carried higher than the crossbar. See also 80.1.

The spin-o-rama type move where the player completes a 360° turn as he approaches the goal, shall be permitted as this involves continuous motion.

Only a player designated as a goalkeeper or alternate goalkeeper may defend against the penalty shot.

The goalkeeper must remain in his crease until the player taking the penalty shot has touched the puck.

If at the time a penalty shot is awarded, the goalkeeper of the penalized team has been removed from the ice to substitute another player, the goalkeeper shall be permitted to return to the ice before the penalty shot is taken.

The team against whom the penalty shot has been assessed may replace their goalkeeper to defend against the penalty shot, however, the substitute goalkeeper is required to remain in the game until the next stoppage of play.

While the penalty shot is being taken, players of both sides shall withdraw to the sides of the rink and in front of their own player’s bench.

Pretty much as long as the puck is under control of the player he can have the puck stop it's momentum, it's why the spin-o-rama goal and lacrosse style goals are fine.

I'm not the biggest fan of shoot outs but I'm fine with the NHL's rules, more room for creativity is good for entertainment purposes.

Edited by Carman, 18 January 2012 - 06:11 PM.

[AceInTheSleeve]

The puck must be kept in motion towards the opponent’s goal line and once it is shot, the play shall be considered complete


Pretty much as long as the puck is under control of the player he can have the puck stop it's momentum, it's why the spin-o-rama goal and lacrosse style goals are fine.

I'm not the biggest fan of shoot outs but I'm fine with the NHL's rules, more room for creativity is good for entertainment purposes.

OK so they have 2 exceptions to the rule in the lacross move and the spin-o-rama, I can deal with that. But I don't think that those exceptions translate the wording of "the puck must be kept in motion towards the opponent’s goal line" to "as long as the puck is under control of the player he can have the puck stop it's momentum". Infact I think what the rulebook describes is the complete opposite of your interpretation. I also think the rulebook description is worded the way it is for this very scenario I'm referring to on the kane goal - so that players can't just park infront of the goalie and deke them out like an *******.

I dunno the goal just bugs me, maybe its the fact that it was patrick kane. I just don't see any player of high moral character pulling that kind of lame shootout strategy.

[Red Wings Addict]

Can't wait for a Hawks fan to come on here and say, "If Datsyuk did what Kane did you wouldn't complain..."

[Carman]

Yeah, the rules are vague and not well written, I meant to bold the second part of the spin-o-rama explanation. I think they should add the continuous motion to the main part of the rule.

[RedWingsRox]

Easy, ref saw the puck as never stopping.

[Carman]

Can't wait for a Hawks fan to come on here and say, "If Datsyuk did what Kane did you wouldn't complain..."

Well to be fair Datsyuk has quite a few moves that if someone were to translate directly from the rulebook would not be allowed. IE. The Vokoun goal where he pulls the puck backwards into his body because it's not (As it's not in motion towards the goal.)

I don't have a problem with Kane's goal, there is a very high chance that he can be poke checked, Backstrom just did not poke check very well there.

[AceInTheSleeve]

Can't wait for a Hawks fan to come on here and say, "If Datsyuk did what Kane did you wouldn't complain..."

Haha yeah I know, but that's the thing - I would still think it was a bad goal., just like I think the spin-o-rama is a bad goal (and bert has used it a multiple times).

Plus like I said you would never see Datsyuk do something like that, because he doesn't need to bend the rules to score on a shootout.

[AceInTheSleeve]

Yeah, the rules are vague and not well written, I meant to bold the second part of the spin-o-rama explanation. I think they should add the continuous motion to the main part of the rule.

Yeah they really need to go through and clarify some of these rules

[RedWingsRox]

Plus like I said you would never see Datsyuk do something like that, because he doesn't need to bend the rules to score on a shootout.

I think you have a bit of homer glasses on. A SO goal is a SO goal, you've got to deke, slow things down, do the Forsberg, whatever it takes. Sometimes it's a snap, other times it's a poke. According to your standards, Dats' slow change up gainst Niemi might be considered a 'bad' goal then?

[lookalive07]

Both moves are 100% legal. The continuous motion applies more to whether the skater stops and starts, or if the puck loses momentum somehow, whether it be because of a gaffe due to the ice surface (i.e. if the puck stopped because of too much water from the resurface, and then the player has to restart its momentum), or if the player's shootout attempt contains a move that stops the puck dead and restarts it.

Also, the player cannot skate the puck to the left or right of the goal and make a move that causes their overall motion back to the right or left towards the net which causes the puck's overall motion to be further behind any point of their overall attempt. This is different than the puck motion in a deke, where a deke can involve forward/backward motion, not just left/right, shown in both videos.

[AceInTheSleeve]

I think you have a bit of homer glasses on. A SO goal is a SO goal, you've got to deke, slow things down, do the Forsberg, whatever it takes. Sometimes it's a snap, other times it's a poke. According to your standards, Dats' slow change up gainst Niemi might be considered a 'bad' goal then?

No I do not consider this a bad goal, it was actually pretty damn sick. Datsyuk quit skating and was actually gliding in from the blue line, whereas Kane actually nearly came to a complete stop at the hash marks at sat there deking out backstrom. (Kane actually went through a stopping motion to slow himself down)

Apples and Oranges.

I'm just saying where do you cross the line? Theres a reason they start at center ice for a shootout attempt, its meant to simulate a breakaway. I guess I'm being too picky, and maybe I do have homer glasses on because I think if Kane ever pulled that s*** on Jimmy in a shootout I'd be super pissed, cause its lame.

[redwingfan19]

Thought this was the cheap shot techniques thread,

my bad.

[Travis]

I don't see anything wrong with Kane's goal as it's defined in the rulebooks. That said, maybe it's time to re-word those things once and for all to get the language as clear as possible.

Like was said previously, it's not like it's an indefensible move - Backstrom just blew it.

[crotty99]

Rules aside..that Kane goal is pretty sick. Made the goalie look stupid.

[toby91_ca]

No I do not consider this a bad goal, it was actually pretty damn sick. Datsyuk quit skating and was actually gliding in from the blue line, whereas Kane actually nearly came to a complete stop at the hash marks at sat there deking out backstrom. (Kane actually went through a stopping motion to slow himself down)

Apples and Oranges.

I'm just saying where do you cross the line? Theres a reason they start at center ice for a shootout attempt, its meant to simulate a breakaway. I guess I'm being too picky, and maybe I do have homer glasses on because I think if Kane ever pulled that s*** on Jimmy in a shootout I'd be super pissed, cause its lame.

yes, you have blinding homer glasses on. i have no problem with either, but if you have a problem with Kane's, I don't know how you cannot have a problem with some of Datysuk's.

[AceInTheSleeve]

yes, you have blinding homer glasses on. i have no problem with either, but if you have a problem with Kane's, I don't know how you cannot have a problem with some of Datysuk's.

Yes I guess I do, because I honestly don't see the similarity between any of Datsyuk's moves vs. basically standing infront of the net laterally deking out a goalie for 3 seconds.

[toby91_ca]

Yes I guess I do, because I honestly don't see the similarity between any of Datsyuk's moves vs. basically standing infront of the net laterally deking out a goalie for 3 seconds.

Well, there's no comparison from that perspective, but along those lines, there is absolutely nothing wrong with what Kane did, he is moving towards the net the whole time (maybe slow, but he's moving the whole time). I thought the question most had was whether the puck maintained continous motion towards the net.

I can see how a strict read of some of the rules that would be a problem, but I thought they tweaked the rules on that and this is the one I was referring to. Kane might have pulled the puck back slightly..once, but this is where I compare to Datsyuk's and you can see that Datsyuk does that at least as much, if not more.

[rrasco]

It was funny this came up yesterday since Bert ended up pulled the spin-o-rama....and Datsyuk's move could have been questionable in regards to this discussion.

Edited by rrasco, 20 January 2012 - 01:17 PM.