"Distinct kicking motion" in Jets / Stars game

[CaptainScrewy]

Panther fan here. I had no idea Alex Petrovic was still in the league haha was supposed to be a great D-man for us.

 

[Mobiandi]

There is no logical reason for that goal to be taken back

 

[3074326]

Was not a goal. You can’t be kicking in pucks and doesn’t matter who it deflects off of. Is Hellebuyck supposed to not react to it? It was a bullshit call.

It matters when it deflects off the goalie's stick and that's what causes it to go in. I can't understand why that is controversial. It wasn't kicked into the net.

 

[Mr Positive]

If the rule was meant for safety, like that you aren't supposed to be kicking your knife shoes at the goalie in hopes of knocking in a puck, then this goal should have been taken back. Why not kick pucks towards the goalie in hopes his movement touches the puck and it goes in?

But that would mean that the Kane goal vs LA shouldn't have counted too. He kicked the puck in the crease and then hit it in with his stick.

 

[edevils]

Just saying ask any fan of a Canadian team if they are shocked this was called this way...

Sounds like paranoia.

 

[edevils]

49.2.ii says clearly that if the puck is deflected by a skater’s stick, the goal is good.

We can plainly see it deflected by a stick before it reaches the goalie.

I’m not sure why we or the league felt the need to bring the goalie into it at all.

The replay posted here shows it going off his skate. I don't see Pet make contact with his stick.

Anyone have another video/angle?

Because if it did go off Pet's stick prior, that makes this a whole lot easier.

 

[Jason316]

Wow that was clearly no goal!!!!!!!!!!!

Jets got screwed lol

 

[The Tourist]

I'm not sure if it was a kick or not. Every replay I originally saw looked like he just angled his skate to keep the play alive and put the puck out front. The video in this thread from behind looks slightly more like a kick but that's not why it went in. You're allowed to kick the puck, you just can't kick it in the net. The puck wasn't even close to going in until the Jets player knocked it in his own goal.

 

[Blueline Bomber]

I don’t understand why the review took so long. If their decision was “Hellebuyck put it into his own net” (which I don’t disagree with), I could have told you that on the first couple of replays. Taking as long as they did to reach that conclusion was ridiculous.

 

[edevils]

The puck was deflected by a skater’s stick before it reached the goaltender at all. That makes it legal per 49.2.ii.

I’m still not clear on how we got hung up on all this about the goalie.

I think most people don't see where Pet gets a stick on the puck. Me included. The replay I've seen is sketchy though.

 

[Mubiki]

This should have never counted. It was 100% kicked (a forward motion) even if it wasn’t an overly egregious kick. What Hellebuyck does after that kick shouldn’t mean anything because it was a kick that started the whole thing. And it took them 8 god damned minutes to get that wrong.

It's real easy to point out how flawed this logic is.

Lets say a player was a few feet from the goal line to the side of the net and a puck ends up near his skates. He kicks the puck towards his stick in an obvious kicking motion so he can get a shot off. He can't get his stick on the puck because it gets lifted and a different defender, trying to get the puck behind the net, accidentally puts it on net and it goes in.

Not a single person would argue against that goal, despite the fact that it was "a kick that started the whole thing". If a player kicks a puck, especially when it's not even directed at the goal and a defender actively puts it in on their own, it's 100% a goal. This is basically what happened here, but people are getting caught up and completely abandoning logic because the person who put it on their own net was a goaltender.

Edited quick for clarity.

 

[JrFischer54]

The nhl should get rid of the kicking rule there is no safety concern and it’s just making this more confusing then it has to be. Simple fix allow kicking motions to count. I’ll even go as far to say let high sticking goals count too again neither play is increasing the risk of injury

 

[TheBeard]

The replay posted here shows it going off his skate. I don't see Pet make contact with his stick.

Anyone have another video/angle?

Because if it did go off Pet's stick prior, that makes this a whole lot easier.

We've seen a billion goals go in off players skates, butts, backs, legs... all playoffs. Helle negated any reasonable doubt about kicking motion the moment he made a hockey play by actively using his stick to play the puck.

 

[BehindTheTimes]

Not sure why this took more than 7 seconds. I’m on rooting for Winnipeg now, but there is nothing to see here, that was very clearly a good goal. You can’t disallow a goalie that was kicked by a player and this mishandled by another player.

Anyone thinking this was a non goal doesn’t understand the spirit of the rule, no way this simple call takes 7 minutes to figure out.

 

[edevils]

So same set of circumstances but the puck hits Helle's leg and goes in the net.

Goal or no goal?

 

[tarheelhockey]

The replay posted here shows it going off his skate. I don't see Pet make contact with his stick.

Anyone have another video/angle?

Because if it did go off Pet's stick prior, that makes this a whole lot easier.

I think most people don't see where Pet gets a stick on the puck. Me included. The replay I've seen is sketchy though.

It helps to start with the behind-the-net angle at 0:30 below. I recommend slowing it down to 1/4 speed which makes it easier to track the pinballing of the puck.



Petrovic kicks the puck, which bounces up into the air moving in a direction perpendicular to his skate (toward center ice, more or less). A split second later, when it’s about a foot away from his skate, it changes direction toward the slot. Why does it change direction?

It’s easiest to see from this angle:



It’s hard to see on any single replay, but once you realize the puck made a dogleg turn in mid-flight and then watch that ice level angle, it becomes obvious that one and possibly both players tipped it with their sticks when it was about a foot off the ground. Therefore a puck which started in the direction of the center ice logo ended up going through the crease.

 

[Mogo]

Some how this is Sam Bennetts fault

 

[edevils]

1) I see what you're saying, but I don't see his stick touch the puck. It looks like it could have made contact, but it could also have hit a rut in the ice. I don't actually see him make stick contact.

2) I don't think the puck changes that much direction. The puck still goes towards the slot, and not towards the goal. I think if he did make contact with his stick, the puck would have taken a direct route to the net.


---------
I could see your interpretation being the correct one, but from those angles, I don't see him ever touch the puck after it hits his skate. So, for me, I can't say for sure.

 

[Troy McClure]

Sounds like paranoia.

The conspiracy stuff here also makes no sense. The call on the ice was a good goal, so if the league really was conspiring to help the Stars, why would the people in Toronto spend the full run of Free Bird looking for a reason to waive the goal? If anything, it looks like the league was working as hard as possible trying to help the Jets.

 

[Troy McClure]

So same set of circumstances but the puck hits Helle's leg and goes in the net.

Goal or no goal?

No goal there if it bounces off of Hellebuyck’s leg or back. There is also no goal if the puck was actually traveling toward the goal and Hellebuyck unsuccessfully tried to make a save.

This was just a strange situation where a goalie tried to swat at a puck going across his crease, misjudged it, and sent it into his net. It was bad luck for a goalie trying to knock the puck away.

 

[winnipegger]

So it wouldn't have gone in if Hellebuyck didn't try to save it. But you're saying that you can try to kick it in, miss your aim, and get away with kicking it because the goalie was in an awkward position. He was clearly kicking the puck to the crease area. It was going into the blue paint. It's an attempt to score, and the goalie attempted to save it. So every time a player whips it at the goalies feet from a sharp angle and misses, it wasn't really a shot on net? Ridiculous.

 

[serp]

So it wouldn't have gone in if Hellebuyck didn't try to save it. But you're saying that you can try to kick it in, miss your aim, and get away with kicking it because the goalie was in an awkward position. He was clearly kicking the puck to the crease area. It was going into the blue paint. It's an attempt to score, and the goalie attempted to save it. So every time a player whips it at the goalies feet from a sharp angle and misses, it wasn't really a shot on net? Ridiculous.

He attempted to kick it to his stick but his stick was tied up so it went towards the crease.

 

[Dust]

So it wouldn't have gone in if Hellebuyck didn't try to save it. But you're saying that you can try to kick it in, miss your aim, and get away with kicking it because the goalie was in an awkward position. He was clearly kicking the puck to the crease area. It was going into the blue paint. It's an attempt to score, and the goalie attempted to save it. So every time a player whips it at the goalies feet from a sharp angle and misses, it wasn't really a shot on net? Ridiculous.

It's a one in a million scenario of this happening. Guys kick the puck all the time, kicking the puck isn't against the rules. When is the last time we saw someone kick the puck towards the blue paint? It was just a flukey scenario where playoff Hellebuyck made a mess of it.

 

[serp]

It's a one in a million scenario of this happening. Guys kick the puck all the time, kicking the puck isn't against the rules. When is the last time we saw someone kick the puck towards the blue paint? It was just a flukey scenario where playoff Hellebuyck made a mess of it.

The fact that it happened off the foot of Alex Petrovic tell you as much. Like seriously this is the only way a Petrovic goal actually could happen , by accident. If he actually tried to score in any way i don't think he'd have succeeded

 

[tarheelhockey]

1) I see what you're saying, but I don't see his stick touch the puck. It looks like it could have made contact, but it could also have hit a rut in the ice. I don't actually see him make stick contact.

2) I don't think the puck changes that much direction. The puck still goes towards the slot, and not towards the goal. I think if he did make contact with his stick, the puck would have taken a direct route to the net.

At ice level you can see the change in the puck’s trajectory after it grazes the stick. It’s easiest to see in the YT video above, at 1:23, because YT allows you to slow down the already slowed down replay. You can see the puck’s vertical arc when it comes up from the ice, and how it changes after glancing off the stick.

---------
I could see your interpretation being the correct one, but from those angles, I don't see him ever touch the puck after it hits his skate. So, for me, I can't say for sure.

In any event, the uncertainty is enough that the call on the ice can’t be overturned.