Controversial shootout goal allowed (TBL vs. FLA)

[DanZ]

I'm getting confused now. First I'm hearing that the puck goes backwards when he lost it and when people point out that the puck can go backwards during a deke the same people say he lost it on a shot and not a deke? Am I supposed to believe that he shot the puck backwards? You're contradicting yourselves.

Except it didn't go backwards when he lost it.

 

[DFC]

But he doesn't shoot the puck, he whiffs on it. That's unequivocally NOT a shot. He didn't propel the puck toward the net. There is no "first shot" because of the whiff.

So how long does he have to retrieve the puck? Until it hits the boards?

 

[DanZ]

So how long does he have to retrieve the puck? Until it hits the boards?

Until it moves backwards or crosses the goal line, as the rules clearly state.

 

[Boltswin]

Until it moves backwards or crosses the goal line, as the rules clearly state.

Well I am glad that we aren't still waiting for him to shoot then

Edit: spelling is hard

 

[DFC]

Until it moves backwards or crosses the goal line, as the rules clearly state.

The thing is, we've seen a million SO tries where, once the player fans on the shot, the play is dead. So are all of those plays still live, should the player decide to retrieve the puck?

 

[StoneHands]

Except it didn't go backwards when he lost it.

You're missing my point. My point is, even if the puck was going backwards (Which I agree it was not) those same people that claim it went backwards also claim he lost it on a shot and if that's the case, those people are trying to convince everyone that he shot the puck backwards.

The thing is, we've seen a million SO tries where, once the player fans on the shot, the play is dead. So are all of those plays still live, should the player decide to retrieve the puck?

Please post a clip of even one or two plays where a player loses the puck and the ref blows the play dead even though the puck was still moving forward and not played by the goalie.

 

[Beezeral]

The thing is, we've seen a million SO tries where, once the player fans on the shot, the play is dead. So are all of those plays still live, should the player decide to retrieve the puck?

there is a difference between a partial fan and a complete whiff like we saw last night. The puck completely jumped over trocheck's stick on the shot attempt.

 

[nmbr_24]

But he doesn't shoot the puck, he whiffs on it. That's unequivocally NOT a shot. He didn't propel the puck toward the net. There is no "first shot" because of the whiff.

I could see that being the case except that I have seen people miss on shots before and the play was whistled dead. It is hard to remember the exact situation from memory so I admit, there could have been other circumstances there too.

This might be within the rules but I am pretty sure that the NHL intended on giving a player one shot in the shootout, not two and he does stop the puck and it seems that the rules say the puck should then be ruled dead.

 

[PensPlz]

Should clarify the rules that if the skater loses control of the puck it's over.

 

[Anglesmith]

Should clarify the rules that if the skater loses control of the puck it's over.

So a guy picks it up on the dot and swings wide. The puck bobbles and hops over his blade, forcing him to break stride to settle it back down. Ref blows his whistle. Shot over.

I just don't get the point. There is no reason to blow it dead for losing control of the puck. The fact that the shooter lost control of the puck is already a disadvantage for the shooter. If he loses control of it such that he can't get a shot off without violating the rules, then that's one thing. But otherwise, losing control just makes it that much harder to get a quality shot off the way you wanted to.

 

[DFC]

Please post a clip of even one or two plays where a player loses the puck and the ref blows the play dead even though the puck was still moving forward and not played by the goalie.

I'm not saying the play is blown dead. I'm saying the play is "assumed" dead. And I'm wondering if those plays actually aren't dead if the player decides to go grab the puck.

This isn't the first guy to badly fan on a shot. But it seems to me he's the first guy who has actually gone back after the puck for a second attempt (at least to my knowledge). I'm not even arguing at this point. Just wondering: has the play always been still live on those other fanned shots?

 

[Montag DP]

The puck wasn't shot. He whiffed it and the puck continued forward, but there was no shot on goal, no hitting of the post, no missing the net due to the shot.

That is a very loose definition you are trying to apply to this case.

There certainly was a shot, though not a shot on goal. He attempted to shoot, and the puck's direction changed, therefore making it a shot that missed the net.

 

[StoneHands]

Should clarify the rules that if the skater loses control of the puck it's over.

What if the guy picks up the puck and it jumps on him at the blue line and he kicks it back up to his stick and keeps going? Should that be blown dead? I think a more simple solution would be that the goalie continues to play hockey until the whistle is blown.

 

[nobody0211]

It seem like we are looking too much into this...it's clear as day that trocheck took a shot and fanned...obviously no goal

 

[Anglesmith]

I'm not saying the play is blown dead. I'm saying the play is "assumed" dead. And I'm wondering if those plays actually aren't dead if the player decides to go grab the puck.

This isn't the first guy to badly fan on a shot. But it seems to me he's the first guy who has actually gone back after the puck for a second attempt (at least to my knowledge). I'm not even arguing at this point. Just wondering: has the play always been still live on those other fanned shots?

It's a combination of multiple factors, though. It's a fanned shot where the puck continued forward, but didn't go past the net. The player did not overskate the puck and have to go back to get it. And the goalie did not go out and touch the puck. And, of course, the player followed up the puck and finished it.

Have we ever had that combination of factors?

 

[AlphaCatalyst]

It's a combination of multiple factors, though. It's a fanned shot where the puck continued forward, but didn't go past the net. The player did not overskate the puck and have to go back to get it. And the goalie did not go out and touch the puck. And, of course, the player followed up the puck and finished it.

Have we ever had that combination of factors?

All factors except the fan. Puck goes forward and player still shoots. Goalie does not give up on play though. Is it weird it was Tampa again?



EDIT: He does overskate it. So that would kill the play.

 

[Anglesmith]

All factors except the fan. Puck goes forward and player still shoots. Goalie does not give up on play though. Is it weird it was Tampa again?



EDIT: He does overskate it. So that would kill the play.

Doesn't look like the refs blew it dead, though.

 

[DFC]

It's a combination of multiple factors, though. It's a fanned shot where the puck continued forward, but didn't go past the net. The player did not overskate the puck and have to go back to get it. And the goalie did not go out and touch the puck. And, of course, the player followed up the puck and finished it.

Have we ever had that combination of factors?

I think it's a stretch to say the puck continued forward. At best, it went sideways and slightly backward, but not enough to call it "backward."

I feel like we've seen this situation a hundred times. We've just never seen a player think to retrieve the puck.

 

[Canadian Game]

Aside from the puck having to be in a forward motion, isn't there also a rule saying that the shooter must have control of the puck? If so, Trochek definitely lost control of it.

 

[jw2]

It was a second attempt. No goal.

 

[DanZ]

It seem like we are looking too much into this...it's clear as day that trocheck took a shot and fanned...obviously no goal

So if he fanned then he didn't shoot it.

 

[DanZ]

There certainly was a shot, though not a shot on goal. He attempted to shoot, and the puck's direction changed, therefore making it a shot that missed the net.

He attempted to shoot... And didn't.

 

[DanZ]

It was a second attempt. No goal.

Attempts don't matter. Only shots. No one can look at the first attempt and say he shot the puck, because he obviously didn't. A whiff isn't a type of shot, it is the absence of a shot.

 

[dogbazinho]

No Goal!

 

[Anglesmith]

I think it's a stretch to say the puck continued forward. At best, it went sideways and slightly backward, but not enough to call it "backward."

I feel like we've seen this situation a hundred times. We've just never seen a player think to retrieve the puck.

I posted evidence showing that the puck did indeed travel "towards the goal line," which is the wording of the rule. It's not really a matter of opinion.