Penalty Shot Rules

[showtime]

In a game we played last night are team was awarded a penalty shot. Are player went in made his move hit the post, the puck richocted off the post, off the goalie and in the net. The ref immeditately called the goal off, as soon as it hit the post. After it went in, he said it still doesnt count because rules say if it hits the post the play is dead...so my question is did he totally blow it because i was under the impression the penalty shot was dead once the puck stopped moving.

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by showtime

In a game we played last night are team was awarded a penalty shot. Are player went in made his move hit the post, the puck richocted off the post, off the goalie and in the net. The ref immeditately called the goal off, as soon as it hit the post. After it went in, he said it still doesnt count because rules say if it hits the post the play is dead...so my question is did he totally blow it because i was under the impression the penalty shot was dead once the puck stopped moving.

Not as much as you blew grammar class, but yes. Our team not are team.

[OILFAN #81]

Originally Posted by rubecube

Not a much as you blew grammar class, but yes. Our team not are team.

You might want to look at the second word in the sentence you just wrote.

[Resolute 14]

My understanding of the NHL rules is that that would still be a goal. The puck can bounce off the post, off the goalie and in.

The referee in your game would have been using Hockey Canada rules, which should be the same in this regard.

[showtime]

Being it an internet message board im afraid i did not feel it necessary double check for any grammatical errors.

So Snakeye it should have counted then? This is the ref that got beat up in the brawl in that Junior B, and with the way he refs it doesnt surprise me much, hes the most terrible ref i've ever played with or seen ref in my life...Which im sure means he on the fast track to the nhl

[Resolute 14]

Interesting, the Hockey Canada Rules say this:

35.a ...No goal can be scored on a rebound of any kind...

However, the NHL rulebook says this:

25.2 ..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 net)...

Given Hockey Canada doesn't have that specific exception, the call may have been the right one.

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by OILFAN #81

You might want to look at the second word in the sentence you just wrote.

[Howie_16]

Originally Posted by showtime

Being it an internet message board im afraid i did not feel it necessary double check for any grammatical errors.

So Snakeye it should have counted then? This is the ref that got beat up in the brawl in that Junior B, and with the way he refs it doesnt surprise me much, hes the most terrible ref i've ever played with or seen ref in my life...Which im sure means he on the fast track to the nhl

Are you saying the ref deserved to be beat up?

I always laugh at players who have a higher expectation of the referee (perfection) than of themselves. Perhaps someone should beat you up the next time you miss a wide open net or put a pass into your teammate's skates.

P.S.: Relax, I'm only joking. I'm not suggesting that someone should beat you up. I'm just trying to make a point. And yes, you should double check for grammar. Use the "Preview Post" button. That's why it's there.

[Prototype]

Looks like the Snakeeye's have it.

[showtime]

Originally Posted by Howie_16

Are you saying the ref deserved to be beat up?

I always laugh at players who have a higher expectation of the referee (perfection) than of themselves. Perhaps someone should beat you up the next time you miss a wide open net or put a pass into your teammate's skates.

P.S.: Relax, I'm only joking. I'm not suggesting that someone should beat you up. I'm just trying to make a point. And yes, you should double check for grammar. Use the "Preview Post" button. That's why it's there.

I'm hardly asking for perfection from the referee. When both teams on faceoffs are talking to each other both saying "wow this guy is terrible" there is a problem with the reffing. One game he called this year, there was exactly 3 minutes of 5 on 5. The rest was 5 on 4 or 4 on 3. Including an unreal 14 5 on 3s. That’s a clear sign there is problems with the ref. I never said he should be beaten up. I said I could see someone losing their cool with him and doing something stupid.

It’s not even the amount of calls he makes, if its consistent I can live with it. But he’ll call a hitting from behind 5 minute major for a guy pinning someone on the boards. Then he’ll let go an obvious hit to the head where the guy jumps, then calls a weak interference penalty. That’s when things become unbearable frustrating. For the record I have reffed in the past so i know its tough sometimes.

Also talked to the league coordinator and according to him the penalty shot should have been allowed. This ref apparently is being watched extremely closely by the league because of multiple complaints.

[ken0042]

Originally Posted by showtime

When both teams on faceoffs are talking to each other both saying "wow this guy is terrible" there is a problem with the reffing.

Depending on what level of competition you guys are at; I wonder what would have happened if teams had started to decline penalties? Or if the ref refused to let you decline; purposely leave an extra guy on the bench during the power play. I'm pretty sure there isn't a rule for "too few men on the ice."

[calculoso]

Originally Posted by Snakeeye

Given Hockey Canada doesn't have that specific exception, the call may have been the right one.

The Hockey Canada rulebook does have that specific exception, but it's listed as a situation in the casebook and is not in the regular rulebook. Specifically:

Rule 35 Situation 8:

Rule 35(a) states
"...No goal can be scored on a rebound of any kind and any time the puck crosses the goal line, the shot shall be considered complete".
The word "rebound" seems to cause considerable confusion with respect to a goal being scored on a Penalty Shot. The following is a brief summary and intent of the words "No goal can be scored on a rebound of any kind". The player taking the Penalty Shot shoots the puck and:
1) The puck hits the goal post then goes into the goal - Goal is allowed.
2) The puck hits the goaltender then goes into the goal - Goal is allowed.
3) The puck hits the post, then hits the goaltender and goes into the goal - Goal is allowed.
4) The puck hits the goaltender, then hits the goalpost and goes into the goal - Goal is allowed.
5) The puck, after being shot, contacts the boards or attacking player and then goes into the goal. No goal.

The goal should have counted.

[calculoso]

Originally Posted by ken0042

Or if the ref refused to let you decline; purposely leave an extra guy on the bench during the power play. I'm pretty sure there isn't a rule for "too few men on the ice."

Actually, there is:

Hockey Canada Rule 55(f) (Delay Of Game):
A Bench Minor penalty shall be imposed upon any team which, after a warning by the Referee, fails to place the correct number of players on the ice and commence play.