Can't believe how many people are against so many different things in penalty shots/shootouts...all that's going to be left is the skater coming in and shooting on a predetermined spot to avoid violating any "spirit" of the rules.
Zack Smith Penalty Shot goal |Yay or Nay?|
- Thread starter Sun God Nika
- Start date
Wedontneedroads
Registered User
Too close to overturn the call on the ice.
Wouldn't have even been a play if Burns makes a strong play at the offensive blue line.
Wouldn't have even been a play if Burns makes a strong play at the offensive blue line.
If he lost control of the puck and it was deemed a "Second Attempt" I would say no goal but I think it's much like a fake shot and then deke back around the goalie. You could even pull it back to protect from a poke check then shoot/deke, the fact he had complete control of the puck should deem it a good goal.
Roomtemperature
Registered User
Has any goal been actually waived off in the shootout or a penalty shot in which the forward motion rule has been applied?
The 'spirit of the rule' is that the shooter moves towards the goalie and scores, or doesnt or whatever.
This guy comes to a screetching halt, pulls the puck back and then lets it rip from a standstill. I dont think thats what they had in mind when they developed the penalty shot.
Since the guys supposedly kept the 'puck in motion' the whole time then it counts. Perhaps its not about whether this should count or not but they should clarify the rules for future reference.
The guy has to keep moving forward or side to side and cant come to a dead stop.
This guy comes to a screetching halt, pulls the puck back and then lets it rip from a standstill. I dont think thats what they had in mind when they developed the penalty shot.
Since the guys supposedly kept the 'puck in motion' the whole time then it counts. Perhaps its not about whether this should count or not but they should clarify the rules for future reference.
The guy has to keep moving forward or side to side and cant come to a dead stop.
- Oct 31, 2007
- 39,278
- 41,353
Roomtemperature
Registered User
I think the spirit of the rule is to force the shooter to make a decision and not just stop wait wait wait, move back and forth or side to side out of the goalies reach waiting for the goalie to make a mistake and skate it past him to an open net. Not stop for less then a second to make the move.
Alwalys
Phu m.
- May 19, 2010
- 25,894
- 6,140
Not much different than this Datsyuk one, approach-wise
Looking at it now it looks more to the side than I thought
it's way different. datsyuk was not ragging the puck for a while but he was moving it forward very clearly. he pulled the puck to shoot as part of his "move" ... the move can't be stopping the puck and waiting the goalie out which is what smith did.
PM
Glass not 1/2 full
- Apr 8, 2014
- 9,869
- 1,664
You are allowed to move the puck backwards during a deke or windup. Pretty much every wrist shot ever used in a shootout does this. In the datsyuk move right above this post the puck moves backwards for a second. That has always been allowed.
The almost stopping is pretty cheesey but once the NHL allowed Kane to do it the precedent was set.
The almost stopping is pretty cheesey but once the NHL allowed Kane to do it the precedent was set.
GoCaps2004
Registered User
- Jun 26, 2014
- 1,828
- 1,804
The puck is always moving forward. He only pulls it back relative to his body, but momentum is still moving the puck forward. Good goal.
KevinRedkey
12/18/23 and beyond!
- Jan 22, 2010
- 9,838
- 4,757
If it didn't sound/look so stupid, there should almost be a defenceman lined up at the offensive blue line (furthest from SO goalie) chasing the shooter down. This would create pressure and make it so they can't stop without getting poke checked or decked.
Aside from that, it's difficult to disallow these. The puck goes backwards on many shots, but the skating is definitely iffy.
Aside from that, it's difficult to disallow these. The puck goes backwards on many shots, but the skating is definitely iffy.
Quid Pro Clowe
Registered User
The puck I have no issue with. It's always pulles back to take a snap/wrist shot. It was the stopping part that was iffy. Like others have said, since they allowed Kane they have to allow this.
Burns shouldn't have allowed Smith to get behind him in the first place.
Burns shouldn't have allowed Smith to get behind him in the first place.
NyQuil
Big F$&*in Q
It's tricky too because there are complete stops (and it looks like Smith was one of these, but it's hard to tell) and there are those that do the 9/10 stop where they create a big cloud of snow from a stop but actually continuing moving forward very slowly.
Those kinds of judgment calls are hard to assess.
Vipers31
Advanced Stagnostic
The phrasing of the rule itself isn't always the most important part. There usually is a common interpretation, be it official or otherwise, to specify what others already mentioned as the spirit of the rule, which tends to be more important than the literal rule. Was the "continuous forward motion of the player" an older phrasing of the rule, or was that the league's publicized interpretation so far? Either way, that's what makes sense. The point of the rule isn't to outlaw quick forth/back stickhandling or a wind-up for a wrist shot.
It might be in order for the league to adjust the phrasing to represent that a little better, though.
It might be in order for the league to adjust the phrasing to represent that a little better, though.
Smith definitely stops, and pulls the puck back after he stops. Datsyuk never stopped at all.
Thepainter
Registered User
I hate that it is even up for debate. If you want to put exceptions on shoot out goals then go ahead but a penalty shot is something completely different.
He didn't pull it back, he slowed/stopped it to match his slowing speed. There's no reason that shouldn't be a goal.
Exactly. I don't know how anyone can watch that and think it's unfair or a problem in any way.
Anomie2029
Registered User
This is true, he stopped the puck to match his speed - which was standstill.
I don't like it, but these calls happen.
Burns shouldn't have made the play he did, and Stalock shouldn't have been so brain dead on the first goal.
Roomtemperature
Registered User
They can't be because its the same thing. The end credit is different but you can't have two different rules for something that is the same thing
