Jump to content

Welcome to canucks.com Vancouver Canucks homepage

Photo
- - - - -

[Article] Mason Raymondís shootout winner revives old spin-o-rama debate


This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
54 replies to this topic

#1 Alex the Great

Alex the Great

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,863 posts
  • Joined: 17-April 12

Posted 13 March 2013 - 09:39 AM

Another day, another shootout controversy, although you'll be pleased to know this one isn't about whether the player had the galling nerve to try something slightly different: no, it's not that old saw.

It's an even older debate: the spin-o-rama and the suspect motions therein.
Mason Raymond has had the move in his bag of tricks for years, using it to success several times for the Vancouver Canucks. On Tuesday night, he helped the club break their four-game losing skid by beating Sergei Bobrovsky handily with it, and I do mean handily:




But some didn't like it, and count Todd Richards among the some. Heck, he was leading the some.
The Blue Jackets' head coach wanted the goal reviewed in Toronto immediately. "I was trying to get [the officials'] attention, but nobody was moving," he said to Aaron Portzline after the game.
"To me, it looks a little questionable, because it looks like he does take a step backward."
"To me it looks like the puck is moving backward. [But] that’s not the only [shootout] goal that's been scored like that."

It certainly isn't the only goal that's been scored like that. The spin-o-rama is a fairly standard these days, which is why it's so strange that Richards and the other aggrieved parties seem so foggy on its legality.

Hasn't this debate been settled by now? Section 24.2 of the NHL Rulebook makes explicit how the move passes muster: "The spin-o-rama type move where the player completes a 360° turn as he approaches the goal shall be permitted as this involves continuous motion."
That was written in specifically to satisfy the "It stopped!" and "It went backwards!" crowds that are calling this move a cheat now. It's not a matter of whether or not Raymond takes a step backwards, or even whether the puck does, since it obviously has to in order for this move to be kosher. The only question is whether there's continuous motion on this play. It just can't stop.
To my eyes, it never does. It looks, to me, like any other spin-o-rama, apart from how spectacularly Bobrovsky bites on it, and maybe the extra step Raymond takes in the other direction, which allows him to roof the puck with some authority. But even that seems passable since the puck is fully visible and always moving. What's the debate here?


105uyog.jpg

 

Thanks to KhalifaWiz for the incredible sig!


#2 apollo

apollo

    Canucks Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,514 posts
  • Joined: 22-April 10

Posted 13 March 2013 - 09:45 AM

Hmmm I thought it was a little strange since he stopped moving forward himself and even moved back a little if u ask me. But its the movement of the puck that matters... I can see the rule being changed.
2cz94w5.jpg<
The NHL is a fixed old boys club. I've come to acceptance with that and just watch for entertainment. The 2011 & 2012 Canucks are champs in my books.
THE CANUCKS ARE THE SINGLE, GREATEST SPORTS FRANCHISE OF ALL TIME. GO CANUCKS GO

#3 Spitfire_Spiky

Spitfire_Spiky

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 777 posts
  • Joined: 28-March 09

Posted 13 March 2013 - 09:45 AM

There will always be someone complaining when their goalie gets embarrassed like Bobrovsky did.
Mess with the Best, Die like the Rest

#4 Niklas Jensen

Niklas Jensen

    Canucks Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,703 posts
  • Joined: 22-June 07

Posted 13 March 2013 - 09:48 AM

shootout is a skills competition anyway. I have no problem with Daugavin's move, and have absolutely no problems with Raymond's move. Have you ever heard someone speaking out against Datsyuk embarassing goalies with his moves? Seriously, come on. Goalies, if you don't want to be embarassed, make the frackin save and that's it.

Anyway, shootout are for girls and Gary Bettman. Real fans like me want to see continuous overtime - yeah, you got that right - playoff hockey.
Our D's must make opponent fowards going to the net PAY THE PRICE

#5 ChenWei91

ChenWei91

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,404 posts
  • Joined: 02-July 08

Posted 13 March 2013 - 09:52 AM

Just take the Shootout out of the game. There's absolutely no point to decide a game in a gimmick.

(>'-')>Posted Image<('-'<)


#6 goalie13

goalie13

    Osgoodian One

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,258 posts
  • Joined: 30-April 07

Posted 13 March 2013 - 10:17 AM

Or... make it even more gimmicky. Have an opposing player chasing down the shooter (like they do in minor hockey and beer league). Nobody will try moves like that under those conditions.
Posted Image

#7 BabychStache

BabychStache

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,236 posts
  • Joined: 13-October 05

Posted 13 March 2013 - 10:26 AM

5 mins 4 on 4, 5 mins 3 on 3, then 5 mins no goalie. Lol
Posted Image
Credit to Goaltenderinterference for the awesome Sig!

#8 Denguin

Denguin

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,741 posts
  • Joined: 31-January 08

Posted 13 March 2013 - 10:31 AM

5 mins 4 on 4, 5 mins 3 on 3, then 5 mins no goalie. Lol

Or just have 1 on 1, goalies only.

See what dangles Luongo has...

#9 xereau

xereau

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,231 posts
  • Joined: 14-December 06

Posted 13 March 2013 - 10:37 AM

They should just put up the piece of plywood with a puck sized hole in the bottom. 1st team to put a puck through the hole wins. Its about as relevant as the shootout.

Edited by xereau, 13 March 2013 - 10:40 AM.


"In the beginning of a change, the patriot is a scarce man:
brave, hated, and scorned. When his cause succeeds however,the

timid join him; for then it costs nothing to be a patriot."

Mark Twain


#10 Bob.Loblaw

Bob.Loblaw

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,027 posts
  • Joined: 24-November 09

Posted 13 March 2013 - 10:41 AM

Mason Raymond EASILY has the ugliest spinorama shot in the league. He goes backwards every single time, and it's not a smooth motion at all.

I still think it should be good.

#11 Captain Aerosex

Captain Aerosex

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,467 posts
  • Joined: 06-February 08

Posted 13 March 2013 - 10:43 AM

I don't think it should have counted.

I always get confused about whether it's forward momentum, or continuous puck motion, or continuous body motion...but if it's continuous puck momentum, then does that mean you can just skate in circles so long as the puck's moving and you're above the goal line? The rules need some verification.

To me, Raymond's goal was more like a stop and then turning around rather then a fluid spinorama. He clearly steps backwards. I dunno, I'm not sure what the rules are, they seem vague. To me, that's not kosher.

dontforgettolentil.png


#12 John.Tallhouse

John.Tallhouse

    Canucks Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,711 posts
  • Joined: 24-May 12

Posted 13 March 2013 - 10:53 AM

Loved it!!
Posted Image

#13 MoneypuckOverlord

MoneypuckOverlord

    Canucks Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,029 posts
  • Joined: 24-September 09

Posted 13 March 2013 - 10:56 AM

I think it's fine. They do this type of b.s in Basket ball were they do a spin o rama slam dunk. IF they are crying about it, take out the shoot outs. I was never a fan of it anyways.

Players Nikolaj Ehlers have been compared too by the fan base of the Vancouver Canucks.

 

1 Pavel Bure

2 Markus Naslund

3 Nathan Mackkinon

4 Jonathan Drouin.

5 Jonathan Tavares

 

http://bleacherrepor...d-top-prospects

combine results.  Ehlers 5'11 162 lbs of solid rock.  


#14 Virt 'n Kass

Virt 'n Kass

    Comets Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 359 posts
  • Joined: 22-July 10

Posted 13 March 2013 - 11:02 AM

The shootout's just a showoff contest anyway. I think the players should be given 10 seconds from when they touch the puck to take a shot, and they can do whatever they want in those 10 seconds. If they wanna pull a Perry and use a mini-stick, fine by me.

#15 TimberWolf

TimberWolf

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,412 posts
  • Joined: 28-February 04

Posted 13 March 2013 - 11:50 AM

When is something considered ruining the game and discussed thoroughly by all the pundits?

When Vancouver does it. Seriously, seen the spinorama without drama many times and now it's a hot topic again?

I was saying Lu-Urns...

star-wars-hockey-goal.gif?w=284

#16 cIutch

cIutch

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,285 posts
  • Joined: 13-April 12

Posted 13 March 2013 - 11:58 AM

Embrace it

i want all our players to do it next shootout , the shootouts are a freaking joke and a coin toss and shouldnt be looked at them more then that

the fact we got 2 points because of that is freaking hilarious and also extremely pathetic
Posted Image

#17 cIutch

cIutch

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,285 posts
  • Joined: 13-April 12

Posted 13 March 2013 - 12:00 PM

shootout is a skills competition anyway. I have no problem with Daugavin's move, and have absolutely no problems with Raymond's move. Have you ever heard someone speaking out against Datsyuk embarassing goalies with his moves? Seriously, come on. Goalies, if you don't want to be embarassed, make the frackin save and that's it.

Anyway, shootout are for girls and Gary Bettman. Real fans like me want to see continuous overtime - yeah, you got that right - playoff hockey.

yup and raymonds been stopped on that before , thats why he hasnt gone to it in so long

when he did get stopped on it , it was embarrassing

Edited by cIutch, 13 March 2013 - 12:00 PM.

Posted Image

#18 37yrsncounting

37yrsncounting

    Comets Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 257 posts
  • Joined: 08-May 10

Posted 13 March 2013 - 12:12 PM


The spin o rama is only illegal and talked about league wide when the canucks wins a game with it. There are plenty of other players using that move in the league. You can tell Richards was thinking how dare the canucks beat my team, the hottest team in hockey, with that move. Lol

#19 Quoted

Quoted

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,267 posts
  • Joined: 17-September 07

Posted 13 March 2013 - 12:30 PM

Raymond's goal was legal under current rules. Not much more to say on that.

I personally don't like the spin-o-rama and feel that the player should have continuous motion towards the net. Shoot-outs are bad enough but this partucular move is another step away from a legitimate hockey play.

#20 VanIsleNuckFan

VanIsleNuckFan

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,708 posts
  • Joined: 31-May 06

Posted 13 March 2013 - 12:51 PM

Ohhh no, the NHL can't have Vancouver winning a game...there must be controversy!!!

#21 thrago

thrago

    K-Wing Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 99 posts
  • Joined: 26-June 12

Posted 13 March 2013 - 12:52 PM

I know its probably not that exciting for hard core hockey fans. However my wife who isn't much of a hockey fan was hooting and hollering after raymonds spinorama she thought it was great and it probably made it just a bit easier for me to get her to watch the next game. So I hope they don't get rid of it until they get rid of the shootout.

#22 DooBie604

DooBie604

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 516 posts
  • Joined: 22-October 09

Posted 13 March 2013 - 12:53 PM

That move has been used countless times but countless number of players and when they do it...it's applauded as a sweet move yet when a Canuck does it...controversy.

#23 CanucksSayEh

CanucksSayEh

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,450 posts
  • Joined: 07-March 12

Posted 13 March 2013 - 12:57 PM

MayRay don't care.

#24 AppleJack

AppleJack

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,717 posts
  • Joined: 26-February 12

Posted 13 March 2013 - 01:35 PM

I am a girl and I HATE shootouts they are the most stupid lamest way to end a game! I didn't mind mayrays move cause it won the game but would perfer sudden death ot!

w1dzz8.jpg

CHOCOLATE RAIN, YOU GUYS! CHOCOLATE RAIN!

Do Not Trade Tanevbjhfh0.jpg

 


#25 VancouverStyle

VancouverStyle

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,253 posts
  • Joined: 23-February 11

Posted 13 March 2013 - 01:46 PM

Just take the Shootout out of the game. There's absolutely no point to decide a game in a gimmick.



I agree, when the shootout was first introduced into the league, i was intrigued by the idea. Now its
really not doing it for me anymore. I would'nt mind at all, if they used the shootout in the All Star
Game only.

#26 Bodee

Bodee

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,257 posts
  • Joined: 26-May 11

Posted 13 March 2013 - 01:53 PM

I am just thankful to have a player who can perform a move that sends a goalie "out of the building" and makes him pay to get back in.

I watched a guy the other night place the toe of his stick on the puck and guide it all the way to the goal........fortunately he missed.........that for me was cheating.

Raymond's attention to detail was shown by his "roofing" it just in case the goalie made a Lazarus type come back.

I think we have enough to complain about without moaning about success.........and a win. Especially as having to go to a shootout for the Canucks is like placing our fate in the hands of the three blind mice.
Kevin.jpg

#27 poetica

poetica

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,855 posts
  • Joined: 09-June 11

Posted 13 March 2013 - 01:59 PM

I don't see why people are making a big deal about it. We've seen spin-o-rama moves used many times before and it's been specifically legal according to the NHL's own rules (for penalty shots and shootouts) for years.

There's even a long compilation video of "Hockey's Best Spin-o-ramas" which includes multiple shootout shots almost identical to Raymond's.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=8dD4IVVS-kI

Edited by poetica, 13 March 2013 - 02:01 PM.

Go, Canucks, Go!
Every single one of them.

Thanks for the memories, Luo! :'(

#28 Snake Doctor

Snake Doctor

    Canucks Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,431 posts
  • Joined: 30-September 08

Posted 13 March 2013 - 02:02 PM

I am happy we won, but I just feel there needs to be continuous forward motion in the shoot out, as opposed to "continuos motion" as stated in the rule book.
Posted Image


#29 guesswhere

guesswhere

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,474 posts
  • Joined: 02-June 04

Posted 13 March 2013 - 02:04 PM

I don't think it should have counted.

I always get confused about whether it's forward momentum, or continuous puck motion, or continuous body motion...but if it's continuous puck momentum, then does that mean you can just skate in circles so long as the puck's moving and you're above the goal line? The rules need some verification.

To me, Raymond's goal was more like a stop and then turning around rather then a fluid spinorama. He clearly steps backwards. I dunno, I'm not sure what the rules are, they seem vague. To me, that's not kosher.


Fortunately it doesn't have to be kosher for you, in fact it doesn't even have to be edible. ;)

Vague as they may seem, the rules now do explicitly allow the spin-o-rama so the burden of proof is on the nay-sayer, and unless a restrictive enough definition of continuous motion can be applied to this and other moves that are currently acceptable, including deking and pulling the puck to the backhand, I don't see complaints about this getting much traction.

Might as well just enjoy the win.

#30 TimberWolf

TimberWolf

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,412 posts
  • Joined: 28-February 04

Posted 13 March 2013 - 02:14 PM

I am a girl and I HATE shootouts they are the most stupid lamest way to end a game! I didn't mind mayrays move cause it won the game but would perfer sudden death ot!


Agreed. They suck a bit less when you win, but I would prefer the tie if it can't be decided by two TEAMS. Now we have shootut specialist teams getting into (and getting knocked early) the playoffs playing for a shootout by stifling an offense till the end.

I was saying Lu-Urns...

star-wars-hockey-goal.gif?w=284




Canucks.com is the official Web site of The Vancouver Canucks. The Vancouver Canucks and Canucks.com are trademarks of The Vancouver Canucks Limited Partnership.  NHL and the word mark and image of the Stanley Cup are registered trademarks and the NHL Shield and NHL Conference logos are trademarks of the National Hockey League. All NHL logos and marks and NHL team logos and marks as well as all other proprietary materials depicted herein are the property of the NHL and the respective NHL teams and may not be reproduced without the prior written consent of NHL Enterprises, L.P.  Copyright © 2009 The Vancouver Canucks Limited Partnership and the National Hockey League.  All Rights Reserved.