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This topic has been archived.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

#31 guesswhere

guesswhere

    Canucks Prospect

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

Posted 13 March 2013 - 02:20 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.


Classic!

And a plus one for the post, though I would call the other move you mentined showboating, not cheating.

My opinion, for what it's worth, is that since the shootouts are a skills circus, why not have a little fun with it sometimes?

#32 CrippledCanuck

CrippledCanuck

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 731 posts
  • Joined: 10-July 10

Posted 13 March 2013 - 02:23 PM

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


Although I did like raymonds attempt and the win I could not agree with you more. Daugavins shootout attempt is prime example of how the players do not even take the shootouts seriously anymore and it has become more about showmanship than winning. Leave the shootouts for the all star game and skills competitions

Edit

If a team cannot win in overtime they should not get an extra point for succeeding at showmanship go back to 2 pts for reg win 1 pt for overtime win.

Edited by CrippledCanuck, 13 March 2013 - 02:28 PM.


#33 thrago

thrago

    Comets Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 100 posts
  • Joined: 26-June 12

Posted 13 March 2013 - 02:34 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!

Not sure if this post was a reply to mine, if it is my message got lost a bit. My point wasn't about my wife being a girl and liking the spinorama it was more about my wife being a fringe fan who got excited because of for lack of a better word Raymonds goal was fancy or exciting. So IMO if we are going to have shootout we should keep those types of goals because they do amaze people who don't watch that much hockey and hopefully gain some new fans.

#34 clutesi

clutesi

    Canucks Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,619 posts
  • Joined: 29-August 05

Posted 13 March 2013 - 03:28 PM

In a game starving for goals we're twisting the rule book to prevent goals. How about getting rid of the no-icing rule when a team kills penalties. There's so much trapping and defensive play no one wants to take a risk to score

#35 Sixteen W's

Sixteen W's

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 958 posts
  • Joined: 19-February 11

Posted 13 March 2013 - 04:52 PM

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.


At least it's effective. The goalie's out of the net.

Go team.


#36 poetica

poetica

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,875 posts
  • Joined: 09-June 11

Posted 13 March 2013 - 04:59 PM

In a game starving for goals we're twisting the rule book to prevent goals. How about getting rid of the no-icing rule when a team kills penalties. There's so much trapping and defensive play no one wants to take a risk to score


With the inconsistent and downright biased reffing we've been seeing?! That would all but ensure the refs decide the winner based on which team they decide to call penalties for or against. No thanks!

Edited by poetica, 13 March 2013 - 05:01 PM.

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

Thanks for the memories, Luo! :'(

#37 hsedin33

hsedin33

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,122 posts
  • Joined: 14-February 10

Posted 13 March 2013 - 05:09 PM

I love that before mayray turned he totally gave the goalie a wicked snow shower right in the face.

#38 pavel berezin

pavel berezin

    K-Wing Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 82 posts
  • Joined: 09-January 12

Posted 13 March 2013 - 05:21 PM

I can't really say I understand why there is a debate about being legal or illegal. If he scores, he scores, if he doesn't he doesn't. I understand that you can't have a second shot at the puck on a shootout goal, but I get lost when they start talking about "forward momentum".

However I'd be fine with ending a regulation game with a tie. I don't care about overtime, except in the playoffs, and I don't like the shootout.
Pavel Berezin's signature

#39 Peaches

Peaches

    Canucks Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,839 posts
  • Joined: 03-February 12

Posted 13 March 2013 - 06:33 PM

They should have no goalies and have guys shoot from the other end of the ice instead.

Feminism will be outlawed. Mostly because it's a backwards idiotic viewpoint that doesn't serve any real progressive purpose.


Nobody breaks from Mafia... Mafia breaks YOU!

CDCEHL - Winnipeg Jets AGM


#40 Peaches

Peaches

    Canucks Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,839 posts
  • Joined: 03-February 12

Posted 13 March 2013 - 06:35 PM

when he did get stopped on it , it was embarrassing


Against Phoenix last year. It looked he was going in slow motion on that spin.

Feminism will be outlawed. Mostly because it's a backwards idiotic viewpoint that doesn't serve any real progressive purpose.


Nobody breaks from Mafia... Mafia breaks YOU!

CDCEHL - Winnipeg Jets AGM


#41 Jai604

Jai604

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,040 posts
  • Joined: 14-October 10

Posted 13 March 2013 - 07:42 PM

Shootouts are a joke and a gong-show, so I don't see what all the fuss is about anyway.

RIP LB RR PD


#42 bossram

bossram

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,943 posts
  • Joined: 13-August 10

Posted 13 March 2013 - 07:44 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.


The NHL has made it clear that spin-o-rama's are legal as long as the puck is in motion...no matter which direction. I agree the official rules are worded way to vaguely. But at the moment it seems like they don't care how the spin move is exectuted; it's legal. So Raymond's goal is legal.
What is the deal with Mike Gillis, it always seems like he's sweating...

#43 Tragoedia

Tragoedia

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,492 posts
  • Joined: 10-February 11

Posted 13 March 2013 - 08:06 PM

It's legal according to the rule book and a bunch of players do it.
Shootouts are terrible though. I hate winning them, as it leaves me with an empty "win", and I hate losing in them even more. Increasing the OT to 10 minutes would produce more action and goals. 5 minutes is too short, and most teams try to kill into the SO. Often they go back and forth with plenty of chances and blow the final whistle right as the intensity ramps up. 5 extra minutes would provide way more excitement than the 5 minutes of shootout.
I'd rather take a tie every 10-13 games than a shootout (win or loss) every 4-5.

#44 kmotamed

kmotamed

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,051 posts
  • Joined: 24-October 06

Posted 14 March 2013 - 12:31 PM

Yeah, the puck never really went backwards, nor did it stop for any period of time. So the goal is legit. The fact they try to argue it is silly to begin with.

#45 stawns

stawns

    Canucks All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15,690 posts
  • Joined: 10-August 03

Posted 14 March 2013 - 12:34 PM

There will always be someone complaining when their goalie gets embarrassed like Bobrovsky did.


if goaltender embarrassment is the standard, maybe we can get the five hole shot form the hashmarks outlawed for Luongo.

#46 kloubek

kloubek

    Canucks Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,604 posts
  • Joined: 10-July 06

Posted 14 March 2013 - 01:23 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.


I agree. I too am happy we won and it was a good move - based on the rules as they currently stand. But I think the rules should be changed to ensure the player is constantly moving forward. Raymond basically stopped dead and quite honestly - it looked very awkward and almost embarassing. I think the shootout needs to go back to basics with no more of these ringette-style or puck-barely-moving plays.
Biggest Canucks Fan this Side of the Rockies.

#47 Quoted

Quoted

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,294 posts
  • Joined: 17-September 07

Posted 14 March 2013 - 01:39 PM

I agree. I too am happy we won and it was a good move - based on the rules as they currently stand. But I think the rules should be changed to ensure the player is constantly moving forward. Raymond basically stopped dead and quite honestly - it looked very awkward and almost embarassing. I think the shootout needs to go back to basics with no more of these ringette-style or puck-barely-moving plays.


I like the idea of a "shot-clock" - create some urgency in the shooter to skate and get the shot off. None of the weaving back and forth at super slow motion.

#48 Monty

Monty

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,236 posts
  • Joined: 20-July 05

Posted 14 March 2013 - 01:44 PM

Meh, a goal is a goal. As long as games don't end in a tie, then I'm happy. I pay enough for my season tickets as it is. Leaving the game with no winner makes me the loser.

Can you imagine drowning AT a KK Rev concert?

  


i'm pretty sure that's how zombies are born.


#49 Papayas

Papayas

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,638 posts
  • Joined: 17-May 09

Posted 14 March 2013 - 01:48 PM

Meh, a goal is a goal. As long as games don't end in a tie, then I'm happy. I pay enough for my season tickets as it is. Leaving the game with no winner makes me the loser.


are you going to complain if another team do the same thing on the game winning goal in a shootout to us in the future?

the shootout goal was awkward.. Raymond literally stop before he put the puck into the net.

#50 Captain Can

Captain Can

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,047 posts
  • Joined: 14-February 07

Posted 14 March 2013 - 02:07 PM

I hate the complaining about the spin-o-ramo in the shootout. Its always been allowed, so there's nothing to debate. Whether or not it should be allowed is another question. Why does it matter though? The shootout is silly, and the rules in the shootout suit it perfectly.

#51 Monty

Monty

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,236 posts
  • Joined: 20-July 05

Posted 14 March 2013 - 02:47 PM

are you going to complain if another team do the same thing on the game winning goal in a shootout to us in the future?

the shootout goal was awkward.. Raymond literally stop††before he put the puck into the net.


I have a few teams that I follow and consider my "favourites" who have lost shootouts on the spin-o-rama. I don't care. It's allowed, so I don't complain.As for if the Canucks lose a game because of a spin-o-rama, that would also not bother me. The added reason is because I NEVER expect the Canucks to come out with a victory in a shootout. If they do, I'm shocked. If they lose, I'm not surprised. It is what it is, no point getting worked up about it.

Can you imagine drowning AT a KK Rev concert?

  


i'm pretty sure that's how zombies are born.


#52 darnucks

darnucks

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,077 posts
  • Joined: 04-May 09

Posted 14 March 2013 - 03:12 PM

Considering how dumb the shootout is anyways, I think it would be amusing if a player just wound up and took a slapshot from centre ice. Just to make a point of course, although it wouldn't get him in the Coaches (or fans if they lose) good books.

As others have pointed out here the shootout is a gimmick, players should be allowed to do whatever they want. Hell, dive on your stomach and push it in the net, wear a costume. On the team 1040 it was suggested that if players took their pants off it would be mildly more entertaining.
Moon the goalie then quickly turn around and score while he has his eyes closed.

#53 Dragonfruits

Dragonfruits

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,531 posts
  • Joined: 05-January 08

Posted 14 March 2013 - 03:15 PM

until the ref or league comes out and says hey no goal on raymond's spin-o-rama i say he should keep doing it seems effective

#54 Quoted

Quoted

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,294 posts
  • Joined: 17-September 07

Posted 14 March 2013 - 03:39 PM

until the ref or league comes out and says hey no goal on raymond's spin-o-rama i say he should keep doing it seems effective


Flip side is that that move always looks terrible when it doesn't work.

#55 CowtownCanuck

CowtownCanuck

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,476 posts
  • Joined: 08-March 08

Posted 14 March 2013 - 07:00 PM

I'm surprised it counted, only because it was the Canucks. Our friends in the war-room in TO must have been in be already.

I don' mind the spin-o-rama, it's the picking up the puck "lacrosse" move that concerns me. We haven't seen it in the NHL yet, but I think it ranks with kicking the puck, or knocking it in with a high stick






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.