AHL goalie David Leggio "beats" 2 on 0 play

[combustiblefuel]

Maybe childish but he knew about the exact rule.

Its a loophole he knew and exploited it. Blame the game not the player. If your smart enough to know the flaws of the system you deserve one freebie.

[Poe969]

For those saying that it was within his rights to do this or that he found a loop hole to benefit himself, you're right. He found a way to cheat the system....once. By doing that, he lost a lot of respect from people and other players and most likely refs and higher ups. They lost the game and he's made it public that he'll find ways to cheat the system to win.

Totally within his rights to do so but at what cost?

[polak]

Originally Posted by Grimbl420

What he did, is the schoolyard equivalent of taking the ball and going home. He's not going to play in that situation, so I guess no one can.

Anybody who thinks this was good or smart needs to give their head a shake.

No, what he did was play the game by the rules.

Kinda like a player in soccer using his hand to bail out the goalie and getting a red card or if you want to keep it in hockey, it's the equivilant of taking a "smart" penalty like tripping a player on a break away.

If Kypreos or anyone tried to cuss me out for doing something like that I'd laugh right in his face and tell him to cry me a river.

It's a freaking game and he made the smart play. a 1 on 0 is easier to save than a 2 on 0.

[polak]

Originally Posted by Poe969

For those saying that it was within his rights to do this or that he found a loop hole to benefit himself, you're right. He found a way to cheat the system....once. By doing that, he lost a lot of respect from people and other players and most likely refs and higher ups. They lost the game and he's made it public that he'll find ways to cheat the system to win.

Totally within his rights to do so but at what cost?

I think he gained FAAAAR more than his journeyman AHL career would allow him to. As this thread shows, he gained the respect of just as many people as he lost.

[Resolute 14]

Bit of a stretch of logic to claim that "I thought that was funny" is somehow also a statement that "I have gained respect for him as a result".

It looks a lot like you are simply trying to moon the thread up by being contrary, polak.

Also, "playing the game by the rules" would have been to play the 2-on-0 properly. He broke the rules, certainly because it had a perverse effect in making the play easier to defend. But his ultimate legacy from this will be remembered as the cheater who forced a rule change.

[Poe969]

saying you respect him more for what he did seems like such a canuck thing to say.

[Yrebmi]

He gained notoriety not respect. To be fair I am not sure a 30 year old AHL goalie had a lot of respect to lose in NHL circles. It's a one time thing. Beer league for sure.

The situation reminds me slightly of an Avery type tactic (remember when he kept holding his gloves in the face of the goalie to screen him). Difference is Avery was NHL level, and I am not suggesting that Leggio is anywhere near that big of a ######.

[Locke]

Yeah, garbage like this is pure amateur hour.

[thefoss1957]

I could see a game misconduct call being added to the penalty shot in these situations...in the sport I played/coached, Soccer, this would be a clear example of a "cynical" foul, as Polak pointed out...and would warrant an ejection. I could live with something similar in hockey.

[devo22]

always thought stuff like that would be an automatic goal, but according to NHL rule 25.2, the attacking player has to be "in the act of shooting the puck". Only have to change the wording a bit and bush league stuff like that won't happen again.

25.2 Infractions – When Goalkeeper is On the Ice

A goal will be awarded when an attacking player, in the act of shooting the puck into the goal (between the normal position of the posts and completely across the goal line), is prevented from scoring as a result of a defending player or goalkeeper displacing the goal post, either deliberately or accidentally.

http://www.nhl.com/ice/page.htm?id=26310

[You Need a Thneed]

Meh, he played by the rules, can't fault him for that. I expect the rules to be changed however.

[driveway]

I liked it. Displayed knowledge of the rules and a willingness to do what it takes to try to win. Who doesn't want that in a player?

[GettinIggyWithIt]

Originally Posted by polak

No, what he did was play the game by the rules.

Kinda like a player in soccer using his hand to bail out the goalie and getting a red card or if you want to keep it in hockey, it's the equivilant of taking a "smart" penalty like tripping a player on a break away.

If Kypreos or anyone tried to cuss me out for doing something like that I'd laugh right in his face and tell him to cry me a river.

It's a freaking game and he made the smart play. a 1 on 0 is easier to save than a 2 on 0.

Actually what he did was exactly the opposite and he was penalized for it. Unfortunately the penalty was more advantageous than the situation in the game. The soccer example is the same. Both are examples of breaking the rules to take advantage of a situation. He knew the rules and decided that the consequence of breaking that rule was more advantageous than the situation he was in. Personally I don't like it. I think it's unsportsmanlike and hurts the integrity of the game. But that's my opinion and even the board is split on it.

[StrykerSteve]

That's a very smart play by the goalie.

Absolute bull#### though, should have been awarded an automatic goal.

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by GettinIggyWithIt

Actually what he did was exactly the opposite and he was penalized for it. Unfortunately the penalty was more advantageous than the situation in the game. The soccer example is the same. Both are examples of breaking the rules to take advantage of a situation. He knew the rules and decided that the consequence of breaking that rule was more advantageous than the situation he was in. Personally I don't like it. I think it's unsportsmanlike and hurts the integrity of the game. But that's my opinion and even the board is split on it.

Could you imagine if that was your first hockey game as a spectator?

I don't think Leggio was being clever or creative. I am sure many goalies before him thought about doing the same thing but have more integrity.

[foshizzle11]

I would make it an automatic goal. No need for those kind of plays, whether it was in the rules or not.

[GioforPM]

Can't make it an auto-goal because, unlike throwing a stick on an empty net attempt, there might have been a save. But I'd like to see a misconduct in addition to the penalty - and maybe a suspension like Avery got for unsportsmanlike conduct.

[kirant]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

Can't make it an auto-goal because, unlike throwing a stick on an empty net attempt, there might have been a save. But I'd like to see a misconduct in addition to the penalty - and maybe a suspension like Avery got for unsportsmanlike conduct.

Avery didn't get punished at all if memory serves.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by kirant

Avery didn't get punished at all if memory serves.

I meant "sloppy seconds".

[Bill Bumface]

I don't get the outrage.

At one point, some jerk started slowing guys down buy using the blade of their stick to impede the opposing player.

They had to invent the hooking penalty.

Some guy would hit players that weren't near the puck.

I guess we'll call that one interference.

The rule book didn't come from a bunch of guys imagining would could happen, it was written on the backs of a bunch of dirty cheats that have been part of hockey for as long as it's been a competitive sport. Most ways of cheating are covered now, but this guy found a new one, and a new rule will be added.