Gionta's Shootout Goal
ARTHUR:
I believe I was staring up at the rafters in a chorus of "Why, God, Why" at last night's game when CK asked me why Brian Gionta's shootout goal was declared a goal. I replied that it's really the referee's call when the puck has stopped in that situation. The crew reviewed the video again, presumably to see if the puck did indeed stop at any point, though I can't imagine that one could make out the puck on Hiller's equipment. This is one time when the black puck-hiding uniform worked against Anaheim.
For those rule hounds, the rules for the shootout are covered by NHL Rule 84.4 which incorporates Penalty Shot Rule 25 by reference. The first paragraph of Rule 25.2 reads:
25.2 Procedure - The Referee shall ask to have announced over the public address system the name of the player designated by him or selected by the team entitled to take the shot (as appropriate). He shall then place the puck on the center face-off spot and the player taking the shot will, on the instruction of the Referee (by blowing his whistle), play the puck from there and shall attempt to score on the goalkeeper. The puck must be kept in motion towards the opponent’s goal line and once it is shot, the play shall be considered complete. No goal can be scored on a rebound of any kind (an exception being the puck off the goal post or crossbar, then the goalkeeper and then directly into the goal), and any time the puck crosses the goal line or comes to a complete stop, the shot shall be considered complete. [emphasis added]
Now, I can't really see the puck in the video, but in theory, if Hiller holds still for a second, the referee can call the puck as stopped. Any video review would then have to prove the puck did not come to a complete stop. Sadly, Hiller continued to move backward toward the net, and the puck came loose as he opened his body. Sorry disheartened Ducks fans.
0 recs |
12 comments
|
Comments
No you see, it’s because they were looking to see if Gionta had hit the puck again because I’m a fucking moron that doesn’t know anything and I shouldn’t be allowed near a microphone or people in general and John Ahlers sucks too AAAAAAAAARRRRRRRRRGGGGGGGGGGHHHHHHHHH
The West Coast is the Best Coast.
by RudyKelly on Mar 8, 2010 11:51 AM PST reply actions 1 recs
haha, being at the game, i missed the broadcast, but that definitely sounds like some Hayzie misdirection.
by Arthur from Anaheim Calling on Mar 8, 2010 12:11 PM PST up reply actions
Yeah, when I dislike something, I scream at my TV because I know that solves the problem most of the time.
"You know? I might not be wealthy or cool or even intelligent," I said to myself. Then I felt like there was more to that sentence, but I guess there wasn’t.
I scream at my TV, I scream into the open air at a game, I screamed at a car radio once. Alcohol is usually involved in the first two (occasionally the third), but I know it makes ME feel better.
by Arthur from Anaheim Calling on Mar 8, 2010 3:55 PM PST up reply actions
If Hayward does this to Rudy, I can’t imagine a better argument for keeping him around. Get over it, you vagina.
"You know? I might not be wealthy or cool or even intelligent," I said to myself. Then I felt like there was more to that sentence, but I guess there wasn’t.
My favorite part was when he showed Markov elbowing Perry as justification for why Perry slashed the shit out of Markov… except that Perry slashed Markov before that elbow.
The West Coast is the Best Coast.
I remember him saying “Wow, the refs really should have called Perry… that was a vicious slash” and selectively do not remember any such justification statement.
Rudy Kelly: "I’m a fucking moron that doesn’t know anything"

by 










