Quote:
Originally Posted by Enoch Root
The situation in Columbus WAS a continuous play - the shot went in to the goalie, came loose, and was essentially pushed, carried in by the defenseman and goalie.
Continuous play doesn't mean that the puck has to 'keep going', it can also mean that the activity that is currently affecting the puck continues.
If an attacking player comes in and makes a play on the puck, that would not be continuous play, but for the defenseman and goalie trying to keep the puck out, it is.
Also, as I said - if you don't rule it a goal, you have to rule it a penalty shot for putting his hand on the puck.
|
Faulty analysis IMO - the relevant part is here:
i.e., the timing of the whistle was irrelevant to the puck entering the net at the end of a continuous play
In the Hanifin goal nobody touched the puck before, during or after the whistle. Whether it blew or not, the puck was going in.
In the Columbus game - let's assume the whistle happened "quickly" (which is not what I heard)...but after the whistle, as you said it was pushed in by D or G. NOT continuous play.
If the whistle was late...that's a different argument and the ref would say "intent to blow" was prior...see above argument for not continuous play.
Hair-splitting for sure.