Quote:
Originally Posted by djsFlames
Surprisingly, Bieksa called it a kick. He went on in depth about intent in that moment, but trying to cover it up at the same time. Wtf? I think he forgets that as a player, that play happens extraordinarily fast, and I think he was looking into it too closely.
|
1. Bieksa was too focused on whether it was intentional or not. Just because it's intentional, doesn't mean it's a kick. Like, what does he mean by "hide" the kick? The only way he hides the kick is by not actually kicking it. His skate contacted the puck, but the force was from him falling, there's no way that slight extension of his leg pushed the puck forward that much.
2. It's not like this is the first time we've seen goals like this. There have been a bunch over YEARS, and the bar to disallow such a goal is HIGH AS ####. That's the reason why the word DISTINCT in front of kicking motion is known to so many hockey fans.
3. Only one angle looks like he kicks the puck. The others do not. Why is that? It's because in that one angle, Coleman's legs aren't fully shown, so your brain fills in the missing frames to make it look like a kick. It should be judged on the angles where you can actually see his legs the whole way through.
This video got me all riled up again:
https://twitter.com/user/status/1530085055057563648