Toggle sidebar

GDT: Around the NHL - Playoff Edition

Ragamuffin Gunner said:
They ruled that it wasn't deflected, Helly propelled it into his own net.
Click to expand...

"Propelling" indicates or is defined as an intentional act. I see nothing from Helly that screams he meant for the puck to do what it did.

Take for example a routine unscreened low shot that a goalie sticks to the corner or into the netting. I'd say that's "propelling".

Take that same scenario and instead of a shot, a player kicks it and it rides up the goalies stick and into the net. I could argue that kicked puck was "deflection" and should not count as a goal, but I realize I'm being pedantic here. But I'm using these same words to illustrate a larger point.

This was a clear deflection/bang bang action and the letter of the rule should be looked at more closely. But the SPIRIT of the law was certainly violated...hockey doesn't need people kicking away at pucks due to the safety issue. This is a poor precedent bc now players will start doing this since they might get the message that it'll be ruled a good goal.

Best sport...worst league strikes yet again.
 
  • Like
Reactions: GilbertSeinfeld and bambamcam4ever
BHD said:
I don't have any issue with the goal. I don't think there was a "distinct kicking motion", and even if there was, Helly's motion had more to do with it. Bad bounce for the Jets, but as Ray says in Trailer Park Boys... "The way she goes. Sometimes she goes, sometimes she doesn't."
Click to expand...
Was definitely a distinct kicking motion. Hellebuyck has to try to make a save, it’s literally not a goal by the rules. If I remember correctly something like this happened to the Pens years back where the goal was called back
 
BHD said:
I don't have any issue with the goal. I don't think there was a "distinct kicking motion", and even if there was, Helly's motion had more to do with it. Bad bounce for the Jets, but as Ray says in Trailer Park Boys... "The way she goes. Sometimes she goes, sometimes she doesn't."
Click to expand...

Well hold on then, because we're talking about a different set of rules that need to be applied or not.

The fact that the refs on the ice determined it was a distinct kicking motion led them to make a decision whether it was propelled or kicked. So I might agree with this stance IF the refs didn't go down the rabbit hole they did. But they disagreed with you about it being a kick.

If your argument is he didn't kick it/distinct kicking motion, I'm more likely to agree with you.
But I will never get on board with someone who claims this puck was propelled by Helly- that's a major pretzel people are twisting themselves into. It was clearly deflected in by him.
 
Turin said:
Was definitely a distinct kicking motion. Hellebuyck has to try to make a save, it’s literally not a goal by the rules. If I remember correctly something like this happened to the Pens years back where the goal was called back
Click to expand...

Okay, yes, But Helly directing the puck into the net was a bigger factor, no? I guess that's where I side with the officials.
 
Buddy Bizarre said:
Well hold on then, because we're talking about a different set of rules that need to be applied or not.

The fact that the refs on the ice determined it was a distinct kicking motion led them to make a decision whether it was propelled or kicked. So I might agree with this stance IF the refs didn't go down the rabbit hole they did. But they disagreed with you about it being a kick.

If your argument is he didn't kick it/distinct kicking motion, I'm more likely to agree with you.
But I will never get on board with someone who claims this puck was propelled by Helly- that's a major pretzel people are twisting themselves into. It was clearly deflected in by him.
Click to expand...

I don't see the puck - kicked or not - going in the net if Helly doesn't redirect it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CheckingLineCenter and Big Friggin Dummy
We joke about nobody wanting the Pens' coaching/GM jobs, but it's apparently actually true for the Isles' GM job. :laugh:

Staple's saying Holland was interviewed and is their choice, but he's "out for now" and is trying to land the Kings' job. Isles wanted to interview Gorton and were denied. Bergevin, Kekalainen, and Darche are next in line for potential interviews. Owner wants to keep Lou, which seems to be scaring off potential candidates cuz Lou sucks ass, and any GM is still gonna have to answer to Lou so long as he's still there--kinda like Allvin and JR. :laugh:
 
The Penguins have lot of problems and not much to recommend them these days but they seem like a dream job compared to the Isles. They have a storied history but the most excitement that team has been able to muster in decades is playing ice wrasslin' slopshit trash hockey in order to barely make the playoffs, eliminate some dork-ass underachieving team like the Penguins then proceed to get crushed. I don't see anything exciting currently or in the future on that roster, either. At least the Penguins still have Sid Crosby.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Buddy Bizarre, plaidchuck and Big Friggin Dummy
Buddy Bizarre said:
"Propelling" indicates or is defined as an intentional act. I see nothing from Helly that screams he meant for the puck to do what it did.

Take for example a routine unscreened low shot that a goalie sticks to the corner or into the netting. I'd say that's "propelling".

Take that same scenario and instead of a shot, a player kicks it and it rides up the goalies stick and into the net. I could argue that kicked puck was "deflection" and should not count as a goal, but I realize I'm being pedantic here. But I'm using these same words to illustrate a larger point.

This was a clear deflection/bang bang action and the letter of the rule should be looked at more closely. But the SPIRIT of the law was certainly violated...hockey doesn't need people kicking away at pucks due to the safety issue. This is a poor precedent bc now players will start doing this since they might get the message that it'll be ruled a good goal.

Best sport...worst league strikes yet again.
Click to expand...
it’s literally completely legal to kick the puck in every circumstance except putting it on net as a shot. the puck wasn’t going in on its own course, the goalie put it in. it’s the right call
 
  • Like
Reactions: BHD and plaidchuck
I don't know what's more annoying - the Panthers being dirty as shit or Leafs fans making it sound like they are committing an attempted murder on every shift. The good news is I am fine with whoever wins that series.

I don't think it was a distinct kicking motion but leave to the NHL to come up with an explanation that does nothing to refute the notion that they literally toss a coin to make the decisions in such situations. Hellebuyck allowing 3+ goals in a period only 3 times in the regular season but already 6 times in the playoffs is almost as insane as the records Rantanen is breaking.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Andy99 and BHD
BHD said:
I don't see the puck - kicked or not - going in the net if Helly doesn't redirect it.
Click to expand...

Have to be careful with your word choice here. You even used the word "redirect" which is a closer synonym than propel. This isn't me being a dick, it's in the NHL rulebook.

Goalie propelling = good goal in this circumstance
Goalie deflecting = no goal
 
  • Like
Reactions: BHD
Fordy said:
it’s literally completely legal to kick the puck in every circumstance except putting it on net as a shot. the puck wasn’t going in on its own course, the goalie put it in. it’s the right call
Click to expand...

This isn't a debate nor is it THE debate. I think we all agree on the bolded.
We're analyzing how the rules are applied.

Again, I'm not trying to be an ass about this. Dissecting the NHL rulebook shouldn't involve this much debate. If there is, then there's problem with how the rules are written.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

  • ... and 2 more.
    • Total: 10 (members: 6, guests: 4)

    Latest posts

    Ad

    Ad

    Top Bottom