Then why not take all of this subjectivity out and either allow ALL goals that cross the goal line no matter how, or disallow anything that doesn't touch a stick last? These rulings shouldn't be based on "Ehh it was sort of, but sort of not..let's just rule it a goal/let's just not rule it a goal".
GDT: #30 - 12/07/13 | New Jersey Devils @ New York Rangers | 7:30 PM - MSG
- Thread starter Loff
- Start date
-
Xenforo Cloud will be upgrading us to version 2.3.5 on March 3rd at 12 AM GMT. This version has increased stability and fixes several bugs. We expect downtime for the duration of the update. The admin team will continue to work on existing issues, templates and upgrade all necessary available addons to minimize impact of this new version. Click Here for Updates
- Status
Then why not take all of this subjectivity out and either allow ALL goals that cross the goal line no matter how, or disallow anything that doesn't touch a stick last? These rulings shouldn't be based on "Ehh it was sort of, but sort of not..let's just rule it a goal/let's just not rule it a goal".
LeetchisGod
This is a bad hockey team.
no way, he placed his foot so thats a form of a distinct kicking motion without the kicking, he used his skate to score PERIOD
Hire Sather
He Is Our Star
Flavius
Da Gawd
Zats Muccarello
Grinder
Skate leaving the ice prior has been the gold standard. Don't care about other calls that haven't been consistent, the right call was made here.
Megustaelhockey
"I like hockey" in Spanish
- Apr 29, 2011
- 23,461
- 17,607
Nosferatos
Registered User
NoQuitInNewMexico
it's okay cause it's all just the way it should be
You just know there's gonna be chippy nonsense in our zone again and they'll give him a two minute minor for retaliating. Clockwork.
Brooklyn Rangers Fan
Change is good.
Guys, I just looked it up - there's actually a footnote I've never noticed before. It reads:
*Unless the Rangers are one of the two teams playing. In that event, the puck need merely touch the Ranger player's skate to be disallowed; conversely, a player opposing the Rangers must reach back as far as his leg can extend and proceed to perform a "Wile E. Coyote" like leg motion in order for the goal to be disallowed.
THAT explains it.
*Unless the Rangers are one of the two teams playing. In that event, the puck need merely touch the Ranger player's skate to be disallowed; conversely, a player opposing the Rangers must reach back as far as his leg can extend and proceed to perform a "Wile E. Coyote" like leg motion in order for the goal to be disallowed.
THAT explains it.
The Gloaming
23
LeetchisGod
This is a bad hockey team.
eco's bones
Registered User
We're 0 for 5 this year I think so far with the war room in Toronto this year. That was a pretty ****ing pathetic decision--even for them. *******s.
I Eat Crow
Fear The Mullet
- Jul 9, 2007
- 19,975
- 13,635
If Rachunek's goal was no good years ago against the Sabres in the playoffs, how on earth is Janssen's good?
janssen was stopping but he clearly changed direction of his foot. I think he was trying to kick it forward to his stick but it went in directly. I personally that it was a clear no goal.
clmetsfan
Registered User
- Jan 18, 2007
- 4,400
- 1,019
No, it's not. You're allowed to redirect the puck with your skate, which is why the "distinct kicking motion" language is written in the rule. Be annoyed with the rule itself, but it was interpreted correctly there.
I'm a bit annoyed with the Rangers lack of snarl in this game. They are getting pushed around by the Devils almost every shift.
Nanaki
Registered User
They really just need to change this rule. Allow all goals off the skate kicking or not. Or disallow them.
LeetchisGod
This is a bad hockey team.
I would love Hank to get the shutout but pretty premature to call it with half of the game left
- Status
