Post-Game Talk: Game 55 - McAVOY SCORES IN OT - BRUINS 2 Chicago 1 F /OT

Krupp

Registered User
Apr 6, 2012
2,542
1,934
Is Kuraly playing better on the wing than he did as a center?

Or is it just that time of year where he decides to turn on his best game, and keep it running?
 

RussellmaniaKW

Registered User
Sep 15, 2004
19,692
21,783
It's still a handpass. Hand pass is only negated by possession and control by the opposing team. Although the puck may have nicked off of his stick is irrelevant. The puck was propelled forward by the hand and any deflection does not negate the handpass.
I have no idea if this an actual valid interpretation of the rules. I don't feel like looking it up but I suspect the rulebook doesn't cover the nuances of this exact situation (it has a LOT of gaps tbh). either way, I think they made the right call in the spirit of the rule. That puck clearly doesn't reach the player on the rush if not punched forward. All the momentum came from the hand pass and any contact made with his stick was negligible. And I'm still not convinced it even touched his stick.
 

HockeyMomx2

Extra Medium Water, Hold The Pickles
Sponsor
Dec 6, 2008
7,597
5,491
The Most Beautiful Place In The World
I’m also interested in hearing what the rule book says about hand passing it off a stick. Does it immediately nullify the hand pass or do you need to establish possession (i.e. to the degree that a delayed penalty whistle would be blown)? If it is immediate, does this count for accidental contact with the stick? Does it count for deliberate contact with other body parts? Accidental such contact (swatting at it with your hand, then it bounces off your leg or other arm, etc.)?

Whatever the case, it doesn’t seem to be a routine call for a referee to make even if it did barely graze the stick.
I always thought outside of the defensive zone, if the puck moved forward at all and the same teams stick touched it first, play was immediately dead. If opponent touched it first, then it stays live. Apparently I've been wrong for decades on this one.
 

LouisSleigher

Registered User
Jul 6, 2013
2,031
1,889
SW Ohio
It's still a handpass. Hand pass is only negated by possession and control by the opposing team. Although the puck may have nicked off of his stick is irrelevant. The puck was propelled forward by the hand and any deflection does not negate the handpass.
This was my thinking as well. Just because his stick might have ever-so-slightly grazed the puck doesn't alter the fact that the momentum and direction of the pass was determined by hand. Still a hand pass.
 

Glove Malfunction

Ference is my binky
Jan 1, 2009
15,875
8,921
Pleasantly warm, AZ
The puck touches Maatta's stick after he pushes it, and before it reaches Caggiula. So my understanding is it's not a hand pass to a teammate because the stick touch ends the hand pass and only then does it go on to the other player. But to my knowledge this isn't clearly defined in the rulebook, like a number of other things, so I'm not sure and I'm happy to be shown otherwise.

But it's really besides the point anyway. All that matters for the purposes of assessing Toews' response is whether or not he's telling the truth about what the ref told him. If he is, then I don't have a problem with it.
Does it touch the stick? The best I can come up with is a maybe. Even in super slo mo, it's still not even clear if it even grazed the stick. Which is beside the point. To nullify a hand pass, the player handling the puck must do more than graze the puck. They must direct the puck with their stick. It's the same thing, and even a case in our casebook, when a player bats the near the goal and puck glances off his stick into the net. It's not a good goal, because it was the action of batting the puck that caused the puck to enter the net. In this case, Maatta did not direct the puck with his stick, and therefore did not nullify a hand pass.

As for what the refs supposedly told Toews, I wasn't there, but I am curious why they thought they made a mistake. I tried looking for the reactions of the other officials, and really could only see the near linesman. I wonder if the back ref or far linesman saw the hand pass and blew it dead, but no one heard it because the crowd was load with Caggiula's rush. I only know that if they thought they made a mistake, it actually ended up being the correct call.
 

Glove Malfunction

Ference is my binky
Jan 1, 2009
15,875
8,921
Pleasantly warm, AZ
I’m also interested in hearing what the rule book says about hand passing it off a stick. Does it immediately nullify the hand pass or do you need to establish possession (i.e. to the degree that a delayed penalty whistle would be blown)? If it is immediate, does this count for accidental contact with the stick? Does it count for deliberate contact with other body parts? Accidental such contact (swatting at it with your hand, then it bounces off your leg or other arm, etc.)?

Whatever the case, it doesn’t seem to be a routine call for a referee to make even if it did barely graze the stick.
I can't speak to the NHL rule, but I do know in the USA Hockey rule book, there's a situation in the casebook about batting a puck that glances off that players stick into the net. In that case, it's no goal, because the action of batting the puck is what propelled it into the net, even though the last thing it touched was a stick. In order to nullify a hand pass, the player has to clearly DIRECT the puck with his stick after batting the puck , which Maatta did not in any way do.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Fossy21

cat400

Registered User
Jul 30, 2005
7,152
2,264
Jake DeBrusk has been playing his best all round hockey for the Bruins over the last 15-20 games.

He is more engaged on both sides of the puck and made a great back check last night to break up a dangerous Chicago rush.

He then put the cherry on the sundae with his slick pass to Charlie for the GW.
 

Lady Rhian

The Only Good Indian
Jan 9, 2003
23,988
1,876
Lakes Region, NH
I am so happy for McAvoy, he has played very well and getting an OT winner is a nice reward. Of course, I have no problem with a controversial goal going our way - we had a disallowed goal by Blidh because it was gloved in, they lost a goal because it was a hand pass. Honestly, I always think they will be called back these days, so it has been shocking that a couple have gone our way in the last two games...about time! Five in a row!!
I jumped off of my bike, dancing around the room, when he scored. That kid works so hard night after night- he deserved it!!

Great pass by Jake- absolutely perfect.

Poor Halak was all but forgotten on the other end of the ice after the victory! :laugh: So glad that the team all went over to Charlie to help him celebrate his first goal of the season- not sure he could breathe well after that, haha.

Great game last night. Both teams had us on edge for most of the night- lots of energy!
 

The National

HFBoards Sponsor
Sponsor
Feb 27, 2017
29,112
31,730
Los Angeles
Wasn’t able to see the game but watched the highlights. Glad to see Chuck finally get one, hopefully that will open the flood gates.

Kuraly too. That line of Kuraly - Coyle - Bjork seemed to be clicking a bit from the highlights I saw, yeah?

Seeing a huge difference in the game of Debrusk, seems to be night and day from his play a month ago.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Lady Rhian

False Start

Registered User
May 8, 2018
699
691
I think the mistake is that the play wasn't clearly whistled down immediately after having ruled it a hand pass. Hell, we're still saying "if" it was called a hand pass. Absolutely atrocious by the officials.

I'd be pissed too if I was a Blackhawks fan.

It was, you can hear it faintly on the broadcast.

Our defense stopped playing the puck after they heard it.

Be mad at the whistle and the call but not what happened after it. If they didn't blow the whistle who knows what would've happened if we actually played defense.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Lady Rhian

ODAAT

Registered User
Oct 17, 2006
52,169
20,197
Victoria BC
Is Kuraly playing better on the wing than he did as a center?

Or is it just that time of year where he decides to turn on his best game, and keep it running?

doesn`t hurt that he`s playing with puck possession monster in Coyle. Kuraly is a notoriously slow starter, I get it, but he has been absolutely putrid the majority of this season up to lately (and I say this as someone who appreciates him) so it`s good to see his game looking more like we have become accustomed to
 

ODAAT

Registered User
Oct 17, 2006
52,169
20,197
Victoria BC
Wasn’t able to see the game but watched the highlights. Glad to see Chuck finally get one, hopefully that will open the flood gates.

Kuraly too. That line of Kuraly - Coyle - Bjork seemed to be clicking a bit from the highlights I saw, yeah?

Seeing a huge difference in the game of Debrusk, seems to be night and day from his play a month ago.
I want to see those "floodgates" open as well but I don`t want Debrusk laying out his hardest hit of the year against a teammate:laugh:

Solid win, shouldn`t have been as close as it was but....
 
  • Like
Reactions: The National

RussellmaniaKW

Registered User
Sep 15, 2004
19,692
21,783
how scary was that last sequence, though? I was thrilled that McAvoy scored and that we won but that dogpile lasted so long I was worried that Chuck might have hurt himself either when Debrusk pancaked him or when his shin hit the post on the goal. I was so glad to see he was ok.
 

NMF

Registered User
May 24, 2012
220
207
I have no idea if this an actual valid interpretation of the rules. I don't feel like looking it up but I suspect the rulebook doesn't cover the nuances of this exact situation (it has a LOT of gaps tbh). either way, I think they made the right call in the spirit of the rule. That puck clearly doesn't reach the player on the rush if not punched forward. All the momentum came from the hand pass and any contact made with his stick was negligible. And I'm still not convinced it even touched his stick.

It is a valid interpretation. Trust me on this. NHL situation Handbook covers this and other small nuances that are not indicated directly in the rulebook. One of my jobs is to know these rules inside and out. They were a bit delayed on the whistle, but got the call correct. Sucks for the Hawks, as the whistle came as the player was in the process of lighting the lamp.
 

RussellmaniaKW

Registered User
Sep 15, 2004
19,692
21,783
It is a valid interpretation. Trust me on this. NHL situation Handbook covers this and other small nuances that are not indicated directly in the rulebook. One of my jobs is to know these rules inside and out. They were a bit delayed on the whistle, but got the call correct. Sucks for the Hawks, as the whistle came as the player was in the process of lighting the lamp.
I had no idea that a situation handbook even existed. I just assumed it was all open to the refs' interpretation of the rulebook. that explains why the rulebook is so basic in some cases. is the situation handbook publicly available somewhere?
 
  • Like
Reactions: NMF

lopey

HFBoards Sponsor
Sponsor
Jan 27, 2009
14,081
12,782
Frozen Tundra Northern Ontario
Wasn’t able to see the game but watched the highlights. Glad to see Chuck finally get one, hopefully that will open the flood gates.

Kuraly too. That line of Kuraly - Coyle - Bjork seemed to be clicking a bit from the highlights I saw, yeah?

Seeing a huge difference in the game of Debrusk, seems to be night and day from his play a month ago.
I wonder if he was still feeling the effects of the concussion, maybe not so much the symptoms, but more he may of been gun shy to be aggressive. He may have been worried about getting another one.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BMC and Lady Rhian

NMF

Registered User
May 24, 2012
220
207
I had no idea that a situation handbook even existed. I just assumed it was all open to the refs' interpretation of the rulebook. that explains why the rulebook is so basic in some cases. is the situation handbook publicly available somewhere?

I'm not sure if it is publicly available. It doesn't look like they have it published on the website. I wish I could send you a link, but unfortunately, I am not authorized to disseminate the info.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->