Was Krejci's glove-down legal?

[GoldenBearHockey]

@timelydewd made a thread about this exact topic last month: http://hfboards.mandatory.com/threads/sneaky-change-the-nhl-made-to-the-hand-pass-rule.2447023/

Whether it's whistled as a hand-pass or a penalty for carrying the puck, either way this is definitely not a legal play.

Under the new hand pass rule, agreed, still not a penalty though

 

[GoldenBearHockey]

Are you saying he didn't close his hand on the puck?

I'm saying that he brought it down in one motion, EVERY puck that gets caught in the air has a guy closing his hand on the puck, and its NEVER called a penalty unless something egregrious happens, he pretends to drop it, keeps skating etc,

That's not what happened here

 

[tarheelhockey]

are you saying you can't?

you posted the rule, you should know

What do you mean? It's literally right there in the rule that closing your hand on the puck is a penalty.

This isn't even an argument, the penalty is literally called "closing hand on the puck"

 

[WJCJ]

A half a step IS skating. Tossing it all the way to the other blue line IS a territorial advantage. This isn’t difficult.

A half a step is the amount of time it took to catch the puck and throw it to the ice. The rule says he has to skate with it to avoid a check or gain territorial advantage, he just didn't skate with the puck in the spirit of this rule.

 

[tarheelhockey]

I'm saying that he brought it down in one motion, EVERY puck that gets caught in the air has a guy closing his hand on the puck, and its NEVER called a penalty unless something egregrious happens, he pretends to drop it, keeps skating etc,

That's not what happened here

C'mon now. You know the difference between catching a puck over-hand and dropping it, versus catching it and then holding it while skating so you can flip it under-hand past a defenseman and keep on skating with it.

This play has NEVER been legal, and the league even made a specific modification to the rule book to address this incredibly specific scenario so there would be no possible ambiguity around it.

 

[bb_fan]

What do you mean? It's literally right there in the rule that closing your hand on the puck is a penalty.

This isn't even an argument, the penalty is literally called "closing hand on the puck"

no, its not even an argument.

read the rule.

you are allowed to catch the puck.

you are not allowed to close you hand on it while it is on the ice.

it wasn't on the ice, he caught it out of the air, witch is allowed.

 

[pheasant]

Doesn't say anything about where you can or where you can not throw it

That rule doesn't But other rules do.

RULE 67.1 Handling Puck - A player shall be permitted to stop or “bat” a puck in the air with his open hand, or push it along the ice with his hand, and the play shall not be stopped unless, in the opinion of the on-ice officials, he has deliberately directed the puck to a teammate, or has allowed his team to gain an advantage, in any zone other than the defending zone, in which case the play shall be stopped and a face-off conducted (see Rule 79 – Hand Pass). Play will not be stopped for any hand pass by players in their own defending zone.

Looks like he might have closed his hand on it so as to toss it, making it illegal. That's only allowed, as I bolded, "with an open hand".

But even if someone wants to claim he didn't close his hand, at the very least he gained an advantage in the neutral zone, as I bolded above. So if nothing else it should have been whistled dead.

 

[tarheelhockey]

no, its not even an argument.

read the rule.

you are allowed to catch the puck.

you are not allowed to close you hand on it while it is on the ice.

it wasn't on the ice, he caught it out of the air, witch is allowed.
View attachment 104637

Did you not read the entire first paragraph?

 

[chizzler]

Krejci has gotten a grabbing the puck penalty for a lot less. He got away with one. Maybe he grabbed , maybe not. Could easily go both ways.

 

[DrJustice]

Probably not, but at that point the momentum had clearly swung the other way.

Doubt it would have effected the outcome of the game, Bruins probably just end up winning in OT.

Either way, it only confirms that the only consistency in officiating in the NHL is their inconsistency.

 

[WJCJ]

He caught the puck with a closed hand and flipped it forward past the defender.

No matter how you interpret the rules, that is not a legal play. It's either a whistle (territorial advantage principle) or a penalty (closing hand on the puck) but it is definitely not legal.

The rule says that he would have to skate with the puck, he only skated half a step, a fraction of a second. He did not catch the puck then skate with it to avoid a check of gain territorial advantage. Where does it say that a player can't throw the puck forward? I see where it says he can't skate with it to gain territorial advantage.

 

[Beezeral]

He had the puck for a fraction of a second, I don't believe that he had the control to know exactly where the puck was going. He caught the puck and threw it down in a fraction of a second. That is allowed. He didn't skate with the puck and that is what the rule says is not allowed.

You are right. It’s just a happy coincidence that he dropped the puck straight down, caught a magical bounce that had enough momentum to carry it all the way from the bruins blue line past the hurricanes defenseman to the hurricanes blue line for him to gain possession again and make the pass for the goal. How fortunate the bruins are that this play that’s defied the laws of physics went in their favor last night.

 

[GoldenBearHockey]

That rule doesn't But other rules do.

RULE 67.1 Handling Puck - A player shall be permitted to stop or “bat” a puck in the air with his open hand, or push it along the ice with his hand, and the play shall not be stopped unless, in the opinion of the on-ice officials, he has deliberately directed the puck to a teammate, or has allowed his team to gain an advantage, in any zone other than the defending zone, in which case the play shall be stopped and a face-off conducted (see Rule 79 – Hand Pass). Play will not be stopped for any hand pass by players in their own defending zone.

Looks like he might have closed his hand on it so as to toss it, making it illegal. That's only allowed, as I bolded, "with an open hand".

But even if someone wants to claim he didn't close his hand, at the very least he gained an advantage in the neutral zone, as I bolded above. So if nothing else it should have been whistled dead.

Which I agreed with, noting the change. I still don't think it rose to the level of a 2 min penalty

 

[tarheelhockey]

The rule says that he would have to skate with the puck, he only skated half a step, a fraction of a second. He did not catch the puck then skate with it to avoid a check of gain territorial advantage. Where does it say that a player can't throw the puck forward? I see where it says he can't skate with it to gain territorial advantage.

Come on now. How long have you watched hockey and you're arguing that a player should be able to grab the puck out of the air with a closed hand, throw it over the defense, and go retrieve it? Have you EVER seen something like that allowed without a penalty?

The rule clearly says: "must immediately place or knock it down to the ice". Not hold it, turn his hand over, and flip it past the defense. That's so obviously illegal that arguing about whether it's legal is starting to feel like crazy-pills.

 

[WJCJ]

What do you mean? It's literally right there in the rule that closing your hand on the puck is a penalty.

This isn't even an argument, the penalty is literally called "closing hand on the puck"

The rule for closing your hand on the puck in the rule that is posted is for when it is on the ice or if the player skates with it to avoid a check or gain territorial advantage, as far s I saw, Krejci did neither of those. He threw it within a fraction of a second and he only skated half a step.

 

[GoldenBearHockey]

The rule says that he would have to skate with the puck, he only skated half a step, a fraction of a second. He did not catch the puck then skate with it to avoid a check of gain territorial advantage. Where does it say that a player can't throw the puck forward? I see where it says he can't skate with it to gain territorial advantage.

Different rule, handpass rule, it clearly states that.

 

[Spirit of 67]

Is this a legal play?



You're allowed to glove the puck down, but to me, Krejci violates the rules by catching it, bringing his glove down with it, then throwing it past the defenceman. Should this be legal or a penalty?

EDIT: Here is the relevant rule, by the way:

I don't really see an issue. Gloving it and throwing it in front of him is pretty much one continuous movement.
I think it's legal. Pretty grey though.

 

[Beezeral]

The rule says that he would have to skate with the puck, he only skated half a step, a fraction of a second. He did not catch the puck then skate with it to avoid a check of gain territorial advantage. Where does it say that a player can't throw the puck forward? I see where it says he can't skate with it to gain territorial advantage.

Let’s try this another way. If throwing the puck forward after catching it is legal, why don’t we see it every night especially in the defensive zone. It’s much safer to throw the puck down the ice instead of dropping it at your feet and shooting it down with your stick.

 

[Beezeral]

Which I agreed with, noting the change. I still don't think it rose to the level of a 2 min penalty

Fine. Let’s say it’s not a penalty. At minimum the play should have been blown dead. There is no circumstance where that play should have been allowed to continue.

 

[tarheelhockey]

The rule for closing your hand on the puck in the rule that is posted is for when it is on the ice or if the player skates with it to avoid a check or gain territorial advantage, as far s I saw, Krejci did neither of those. He threw it within a fraction of a second and he only skated half a step.

Skating half a step is still skating with it, in the context of lobbing it past the defenseman with an underhand flip. It's not like he swatted it cleanly, he blatantly caught the puck in a way that eliminates any possibility that his hand was open, while taking forward strides, and flipped the puck past the defenseman to gain an obvious territorial advantage.

It's crazy that this is an argument right now.

 

[WJCJ]

Come on now. How long have you watched hockey and you're arguing that a player should be able to grab the puck out of the air with a closed hand, throw it over the defense, and go retrieve it? Have you EVER seen something like that allowed without a penalty?

The rule clearly says: "must immediately place or knock it down to the ice". Not hold it, turn his hand over, and flip it past the defense. That's so obviously illegal that arguing about whether it's legal is starting to feel like crazy-pills.

I am just looking at the rule, that is what it says, it says that a player is allowed to CATCH the puck. If I didn't read this rule I would have agreed with you but I cannot figure out how this is against this rule going by what it says. Where exactly is the violation? I just don't see it in that rule and that is what I am basing it on. Sometimes the rules are not exactly what I thought they were and what I thought was obvious really is wrong. It happens.

 

[BruinsBtn]

Fine. Let’s say it’s not a penalty. At minimum the play should have been blown dead. There is no circumstance where that play should have been allowed to continue.

There's no provision to blow it down. You'd have to give him a penalty. ... and given that they had just let Carolina off the hook for clearly batting the puck over the glass in the defensive zone, then you can see why the ref let it slide.

 

[bb_fan]

Did you not read the entire first paragraph?

did you not read the first paragraph at all?

 

[pheasant]

Which I agreed with, noting the change. I still don't think it rose to the level of a 2 min penalty

Works for me. I think the play was somewhere between this 'whistle the play dead,' and a minor penalty.

I said it was clearly a minor before, but I can see an argument made after reading some more of the rulebook. It's pretty grey when deciding if that toss would constitute 'closing his hand'.

 

[joe dirte]

Bruins were owed a call after that atrocisity in Toronto a few weeks back.

you guys still crying about getting completely outplayed and coming up short?????