OT: When a goal is a goal but isn't a goal, why the goal?

[therealkoho]

Maybe somebody from the so called "war room" needs an explanation of when a goal is a goal but isn't a goal? You can't ask me because now after seeing this I'm currently residing on I'venoidea St.!



forward to 5:05

Click to read more...

 

[notDatsyuk]

Maybe somebody from the so called "war room" needs an explanation of when a goal is a goal but isn't a goal? You can't ask me because now after seeing this I'm currently residing on I'venoidea St.!



forward to 5:05

Not sure what you mean.

The difference is between "kicking" and "directing".

I don't think there's any dispute about the first one - definite kick, didn't hit anyone's stick after, so no goal.

The second one is a bit less clear, but not a distinct kicking motion.

 

[therealkoho]

Not sure what you mean.

The difference is between "kicking" and "directing".

I don't think there's any dispute about the first one - definite kick, didn't hit anyone's stick after, so no goal.

The second one is a bit less clear, but not a distinct kicking motion.

iunno!

it sure looked like the Rags player reached out with his foot to direct the puck into/onto the net, whereas McMann was trying to direct the puck up to his stick and it inadvertently deflected and went into the net.

Put it this way if that Ranger goal would've been scored on the Leafs then how would it look?

tbh I'm not saying it wasn't a goal in either case

 

[notDatsyuk]

iunno!

it sure looked like the Rags player reached out with his foot to direct the puck into/onto the net, whereas McMann was trying to direct the puck up to his stick and it inadvertently deflected and went into the net.

Put it this way if that Ranger goal would've been scored on the Leafs then how would it look?

tbh I'm not saying it wasn't a goal in either case

As you say, "reached out ... to direct". He directed it into the net, which is legal.

McMann was trying to kick the puck up to his stick, which is fine, except that the puck went into the net without hitting any stick.

As far as I'm concerned, the Rangers' goal would look like a goal even against Toronto, but I know there are some posters who disagree.

I would like to believe that the result of either play would be the same regardless of the teams involved.

 

[therealkoho]

As you say, "reached out ... to direct". He directed it into the net, which is legal.

McMann was trying to kick the puck up to his stick, which is fine, except that the puck went into the net without hitting any stick.

As far as I'm concerned, the Rangers' goal would look like a goal even against Toronto, but I know there are some posters who disagree.

I would like to believe that the result of either play would be the same regardless of the teams involved.

Rags goal then is a good goal, as McManns should've have been, but wasn't a goal still baffles me.

 

[notDatsyuk]

Rags goal then is a good goal, as McManns should've have been, but wasn't a goal still baffles me.

McMann clearly kicked the puck (up to his stick), but the puck, after being kicked, went in the net without touching any stick. According to the rules, not a goal.