Baggins Posted November 14, 2018 Share Posted November 14, 2018 7 hours ago, canuckledraggin said: Was there a grassy knoll? With a gift shop..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Twilight Sparkle Posted November 14, 2018 Share Posted November 14, 2018 8 hours ago, Xanlet said: I'm just going to leave this here. The rule is still the same, the NHL brass is still the same, yet the calls go one way against the Canucks and the exact opposite when it would be in the Canucks favor NHL: you make the rules and we will break em! yea! what if you make the rules? NHL: we'll change the rules! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baggins Posted November 14, 2018 Share Posted November 14, 2018 8 minutes ago, spook007 said: Ok after seeing 4 threads discussing this, what is a kicking motion? It seems to be the sticking point here... No, no... 'Distinct' kicking motion. It's a sticking point throughout the league. It really comes down to a matter of opinion on any given play. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EdgarM Posted November 14, 2018 Share Posted November 14, 2018 4 hours ago, J-P said: This thread is pathetic. He didn’t kick the puck, he angled his skate so he could steer it. That’s allowed. He did angle it with a motion happening quite close to the moment the puck hit the skate, so definitely a close call that could go both ways. But conspiracy? That’s ridiculous. Exact same play as Sbisa's and Burrows in LA which were BOTH NO GOALS! You tell me the difference between these plays, I am dying to hear your explanation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhillipBlunt Posted November 14, 2018 Share Posted November 14, 2018 9 hours ago, xereau said: Our franchise has a beloved 20 foot cast bronze statue outside our arena, eternally celebrating a moment in time that was based 100% in mocking of the NHL Referee's Union. Think this might have something to do with it? If it does have something to do with it, then the referees need to grow up. Their very job requires them to be an impartial governing body ensuring that both teams competing follow the established rules of the game. If a statue alters the way they do their job, they shouldn't do the job. Simple as that. The referees are abject failures league wide. They blow calls (and badly at that) nearly every night that the league's in action. By any measure, they're just not very good at what they do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhillipBlunt Posted November 14, 2018 Share Posted November 14, 2018 4 hours ago, J-P said: This thread is pathetic. He didn’t kick the puck, he angled his skate so he could steer it. That’s allowed. He did angle it with a motion happening quite close to the moment the puck hit the skate, so definitely a close call that could go both ways. But conspiracy? That’s ridiculous. "Angling" the puck with a skate and kicking it in both constitute a player using their skate to direct a puck into a net. That's like me saying I didn't punch a guy, I merely walked briskly in his direction with my fist raised and he just happened to be in the way of my fist's trajectory. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rychicken Posted November 14, 2018 Share Posted November 14, 2018 I haven't seen reffing like that since Cedric Hathaway.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
khay Posted November 14, 2018 Share Posted November 14, 2018 Kicked in but NHL has been known to f*ck up calls, not just for the Canucks but for almost every team. I almost feel like NHL should change the rules and allow kicking the puck in at this point. You should be able to use any part of the body except for your hand hand/arm. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alflives Posted November 14, 2018 Share Posted November 14, 2018 4 minutes ago, khay said: Kicked in but NHL has been known to f*ck up calls, not just for the Canucks but for almost every team. I almost feel like NHL should change the rules and allow kicking the puck in at this point. You should be able to use any part of the body except for your hand hand/arm. Safety issues with kicking at pucks in the crease? The easy fix, and safest, is to disallow any goal off a skate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FijianCanuck Posted November 14, 2018 Share Posted November 14, 2018 So kicked in that the whitecaps are reaching out to kuhnhakl... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mll Posted November 14, 2018 Share Posted November 14, 2018 4 minutes ago, Alflives said: Safety issues with kicking at pucks in the crease? The easy fix, and safest, is to disallow any goal off a skate. Gaunce 1st NHL goal was deflected off his skate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheGuardian_ Posted November 14, 2018 Share Posted November 14, 2018 From one angle it looks like Pettersson's skate kicks it. The puck accelerates AFTER it hits his skate under Markstrom, after contact it goes up and then under Markstrom. BUT He did move his leg about 2 inches in the direction of goal. Players are allowed to turn their skates to angle a puck. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EmilyM Posted November 14, 2018 Share Posted November 14, 2018 27 minutes ago, khay said: Kicked in but NHL has been known to f*ck up calls, not just for the Canucks but for almost every team. I almost feel like NHL should change the rules and allow kicking the puck in at this point. You should be able to use any part of the body except for your hand hand/arm. I don't know, you don't want to see players deliberately kicking at open pucks in front of the net if they become legal. The current rule is fine. The consistency in the enforcing of the rule is what needs work. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EmilyM Posted November 14, 2018 Share Posted November 14, 2018 25 minutes ago, Alflives said: Safety issues with kicking at pucks in the crease? The easy fix, and safest, is to disallow any goal off a skate. Including things like completely inadvertent deflections that merely graze off of a player's skate from a point shot? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baggins Posted November 14, 2018 Share Posted November 14, 2018 1 hour ago, PhillipBlunt said: "Angling" the puck with a skate and kicking it in both constitute a player using their skate to direct a puck into a net. That's like me saying I didn't punch a guy, I merely walked briskly in his direction with my fist raised and he just happened to be in the way of my fist's trajectory. Was there a "distinct punching motion"? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhillipBlunt Posted November 14, 2018 Share Posted November 14, 2018 Just now, Baggins said: Was there a "distinct punching motion"? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spook007 Posted November 14, 2018 Share Posted November 14, 2018 3 hours ago, Baggins said: No, no... 'Distinct' kicking motion. It's a sticking point throughout the league. It really comes down to a matter of opinion on any given play. Even the video sent out to explain the rule has panellist scratching their head. I'm still think that if all the goals shown in the videos (in particular the Sedin goal) are no goals, then last nights one should also have been called a no goal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-Vintage Canuck- Posted November 14, 2018 Share Posted November 14, 2018 4 hours ago, 406in604 said: Doesnt the league usually issue a statement of 'fact' on why it was called the way it was? I'd be curious on this one. Here is the league's explanation of the review: Quote At 3:26 of the third period in the Canucks/Islanders game, the Situation Room initiated a video review to further examine a play at the Vancouver net. Video review confirmed the referee's call on the ice that the puck deflected off Tom Kuhnhackl's skate and entered the Vancouver net in a legal fashion. According to Rule 49.2, "A puck that deflects into the net off an attacking player's skate who does not use a distinct kicking motion is a legitimate goal." Good goal New York. https://www.nhl.com/news/vancouver-canucks-new-york-islanders-situation-room/c-301908300 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xanlet Posted November 14, 2018 Share Posted November 14, 2018 38 minutes ago, -Vintage Canuck- said: Here is the league's explanation of the review: https://www.nhl.com/news/vancouver-canucks-new-york-islanders-situation-room/c-301908300 Until they explain how Mike Murphy can turn "twisting his toe" into "distinct kicking motion", all explanations are worthless Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lmm Posted November 14, 2018 Share Posted November 14, 2018 20 minutes ago, Xanlet said: Until they explain how Mike Murphy can turn "twisting his toe" into "distinct kicking motion", all explanations are worthless that Murphy explanation should be brassed and mounted beside the statue of Roger maybe just put a speaker inside the Roger statue activated by a "distinct kicking motion" sensor, of course Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.thumb.jpeg.0d00651e5a8af8c57be7732916818427.jpeg)
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.