NoVaCapsFan
Registered User
- Apr 19, 2017
- 214
- 318
Didn't look intentional, but it's not soccer.Directing the puck in on purpose with anything but a stick is illegal
It is NOT kicking it in. Knee not foot. Didn't look like it was directed either.Kicked it in. GOOOOAL! Not.
NHL has allowed a lot worseDidn't look intentional, but it's not soccer.
Which is another effing stupid rule. The only reason to disallow kicked in goals is to prevent someone getting kicked by a skate.Directing the puck in on purpose with anything but a stick is illegal
They'll allow worse by this weekendNHL has allowed a lot worse
Was pretty obvious it was directed in with how the angle and motion of his leg changedIt is NOT kicking it in. Knee not foot. Didn't look like it was directed either.
Was it Knies?Knees it in.
That Shouldn’t count but it will
ESPN+ isn't blacking me out anymore. Just didn't want to spoil me with the 1st periodBlackout restrictions are such a joke
Wrong, you'd fit right inI'm 0-2 on goal reviews tonight in this game. Def not situation room worthy.
It is NOT kicking it in. Knee not foot. Didn't look like it was directed either.
They don't want you lifting your leg up to knee it in, pulls the skate blade pretty far off the ice.Which is another effing stupid rule. The only reason to disallow kicked in goals is to prevent someone getting kicked by a skate.
Didn't look intentional, but it's not soccer.
They don't want you lifting your leg up to knee it in, pulls the skate blade pretty far off the ice.
I saw it more as him trying to get the puck to his stick. Not arguing the call, but intent gets into odd philosophy of mind stuff.Uhhh that was pretty much the intent when he kicked his leg up at the puck...
Didn't look intentional, but it's not soccer.
Didn't see him raise his leg but it was it was almost impossible to tell if he hit it with his leg or his glove.Uhhh that was pretty much the intent when he kicked his leg up at the puck...