Rule 69 - Interference on the Goalkeeper

[NJDwoot]

Under rule 69 there is a little sentence that I am curious what it consists of...

69.4 Contact Outside the Goal Crease

When a goalkeeper has played the puck outside of his crease and is then prevented from returning to his crease area due to the deliberate actions of an attacking player, such player may be penalized for goalkeeper interference. Similarly, the goalkeeper may be penalized, if by his actions outside of his crease he deliberately interferes with an attacking player who is attempting to play the puck or an opponent

If an attacking player is racing for the puck that is heading towards the goalie, no one else is really around so its pretty clear the player is going for it. As the attacking player is getting the puck, the goalie does a diving poke check (essentially trying to get to the puck first)... which causes the attacking player to run into him and fly over.

Does that scenario fall under this rule or no?

Thanks in advance.

Click to read more...

 

[Gino 14]

If the goalie doesn't get the puck but trips up the attacker, technically yes. Good luck getting a call on that unless it's very obvious that the goalie made no attempt to play the puck. It may be in the rules but it probably won't get called.

 

[NJDwoot]

Ah I see. it wasnt called. I'm just curious if it would fall under that rule.

Thanks for the reply.

 

[densetsu]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W5u0khFnHUg -- I love any excuse to post this video.

As to your scenario, I was always under the impression that:

• If the goalie touched the puck first (and especially if he poked it away, forcing the skater to double-back and get it), then the goalie is in the clear.
• If the goalie went straight for the player, then it's a penalty.
• If it's somewhat in the middle of the above two situations, where he got the puck and player at the same time (much like the video above), then it's at the discretion of the ref.

 

[Copeland]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W5u0khFnHUg -- I love any excuse to post this video.

Absolutely! First thing that came to mind when I read the OP. What a classic.

 

[Gino 14]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W5u0khFnHUg -- I love any excuse to post this video.

As to your scenario, I was always under the impression that:

• If the goalie touched the puck first (and especially if he poked it away, forcing the skater to double-back and get it), then the goalie is in the clear.
• If the goalie went straight for the player, then it's a penalty.
• If it's somewhat in the middle of the above two situations, where he got the puck and player at the same time (much like the video above), then it's at the discretion of the ref.

I love that video and never could quite believe that they called Hasek for the trip.

 

[ORYX]

I think the goalie should be called everytime for something like that. Just because he is a goalie doesnt make it okay to do that.

Its one thing if Gaborik didnt have puck control or it was a race to the puck, in that case fine, but Gaborik had full puck possession and Hasek decided to charge him and slide at his feet.

Penalty no doubt.

 

[Gino 14]

Its one thing if Gaborik didnt have puck control or it was a race to the puck, in that case fine, but Gaborik had full puck possession and Hasek decided to charge him and slide at his feet.

In case you missed this, that's where the puck was. Just sayin'

 

[CGNY87]

In case you missed this, that's where the puck was. Just sayin'

Also where his eyes were looking. If he had looked up it would have been an easy goal, but if he had been looking up I doubt Hasek would have done that