Looks best from the overhead when the back foot moves towards the net and hits the puck, enough to call a no goal anyway. Can't leave your chances of winning resting on borderline legal plays, score some better goals.
Well considering you said person , and there's only 2 types of persons on the ice - the players and the refs , and when a ref gets hit with a puck / falls etc., usually most fans in any arena clap/cheer.
Best Mike Murphy explanation I can find atm, words from his own mouth
They'd be ruling the back skate propelled the puck toward the net rather than redirected it.
In this interview Murphy says it wasn't a distinct kicking motion.
Kicking the puck shall be permitted in all zones. A goal cannot be scored by an attacking player who uses a distinct kicking motion to propel the puck into the net. A goal cannot be scored by an attacking player who kicks a puck that deflects into the net off any player, goalkeeper or official.
A puck that deflects into the net off an attacking player’s skate who does not use a distinct kicking motion is a legitimate goal. A puck that is directed into the net by an attacking player’s skate shall be a legitimate goal as long as no distinct kicking motion is evident. The following should clarify deflections following a kicked puck that enters the goal:
Re: the no goal called. Wrong call there. Even though it may be in line with the rule book. The rule book needs to distinguish between swinging motions of the leg while stopping and swinging motions of the leg while kicking the puck. I saw a player trying to stop, not kick a puck.
The leg does not swing when you're stopping. It stays in the same place relative to the body. If it's moving in relation to the body, it's not catching the ice, meaning it's not adding to the stop in any way.
McClement deserved the penalty he got and the team I cheer for deserved to get scored on during the ensuing power play. You take a dumb avoidable penalty like that, the hockey gods will get you.
Seriously? I'm pretty sure most crowds clap when an injured person is able to leave on their own.
When you take the halo off can you tell me which arena I can go to in North America when the exact same thing doesn't happen when a referee gets hit. Crowds cheer refs getting hurt. I'm not saying it's right or wrong just pointing out the reality that it happens.
That was I think the third time already this season the Leafs have taken a penalty for the goalie snow-shower. They're calling it now even when it's arguably unintentional. So fans (and players) should just get used to it.
Then u saw wrong. He flat out kicked it in the goal. No question.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fred Murtz
Disallowed goal, kicking motion
How, anyway, is there no question???
His body was in full motion, including his feet, before the shot was even taken. His foot pivots and swings but not in a kicking motion.
If you think that is a kicking motion, I hope for your sake you never played soccer. Haha
In the rulebook, if a player is moving towards the net and the puck deflects of his skate as he approaches, it counts a deflection, unless there is a distinct kicking motion and infallible proof to revert the call on the ice.
IMO, this is a goal, through and through. EDIT: Assuming the rest of the game would have played out the same way, it wouldn't have mattered to the final score, but still frustrating to see calls like this made. And as for the Skinner call, if it was done to my team, I would have been up in arms saying it should be a penalty shot. But I can see both sides; Skinner was still able to get in a "competitive" scoring chance in the form ogf a chip aimed weakly in the direction of the net.... Sadly to say, if he hadn't but that chip at the net, I bet the call would have been different.
Last edited by uncleben85: 02-08-2013 at 05:35 PM.
When you take the halo off can you tell me which arena I can go to in North America when the exact same thing doesn't happen?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Preisst
When you take the halo off can you tell me which arena I can go to in North America when the exact same thing doesn't happen when a referee gets hit. Crowds cheer refs getting hurt. I'm not saying it's right or wrong just pointing out the reality that it happens.
How, anyway, is there no question???
His body was in full motion, including his feet, before the shot was even taken. His foot pivots and swings but not in a kicking motion.
If you think that is a kicking motion, I hope for your sake you never played soccer. Haha
In the rulebook, if a player is moving towards the net and the puck deflects of his skate as he approaches, it counts a deflection, unless there is a distinct kicking motion and infallible proof to revert the call on the ice.
IMO, this is a goal, through and through. EDIT: Assuming the rest of the game would have played out the same way, it wouldn't have mattered to the final score, but still frustrating to see calls like this made. And as for the Skinner call, if it was done to my team, I would have been up in arms saying it should be a penalty shot. But I can see both sides; Skinner was still able to get in a "competitive" scoring chance in the form ogf a chip aimed weakly in the direction of the net.... Sadly to say, if he hadn't but that chip at the net, I bet the call would have been different.
exactly. I can see how a person who doesn't play sports could make the mistake that that's a kick but it's not.
But I also think Skinner should have gotten a penalty shot.
So he's looking down, sees the puck coming at his feet, moves his foot in, towards the net, independent of any connection to a stop, with the obviously deliberate attempt for it to meet the puck and direct it into the net, meets the puck with the foot in motion, and it's not a kick?
They got the penalty for 'snowing' the goaltender. Not called often, but it can be called. Ironically, the Leafs got a powerplay against Montreal earlier in the season for this same incident.
