Kicking motion

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Bingo

Didn't this come down from Toronto though?

And if not don't the referees have to decide together?

Not sure it's a one referee thing any more.

It came from Toronto. What I don't get is if that's the case, why are refs huddled around Ipads? I guess they are being consulted as well? If so, what do they do - vote?

I also think that on something like this, slo-mo replay is a huge and often misleading factor. All the things Coleman would have had to decide and do - watch it in real time and see if you think that could actually happen, even for a pro athlete.

[Hack&Lube]

Originally Posted by Bingo

Didn't this come down from Toronto though?

And if not don't the referees have to decide together?

Not sure it's a one referee thing any more.

Yes it's widely reported the refs on the ice ruled it a good goal but Toronto overruled it.

[CroFlames]

If you are stopping, and one of your legs gets hung up on something (say, a goalie pad) your legs will separate. Anyone who has skated, or watched people skate, will know this to be true. There was no kicking motion (lol) and I bet with the snow shower and getting shoved, Coleman didn't even see or know where the puck was. The puck contact with his skate was incidental. Furthermore, the god damn thing was going in anyway.

There had to be a motive to call this back, that is the only explanation.

[dino7c]

They could have at least bought us dinner before they ####ed ua

[tvp2003]

https://twitter.com/user/status/1530232100640608256

Nope. Still doesn't explain how it is a "distinct kicking motion". Saying it doesn't make it so.

IMO, the way the rule is drafted is sufficient; the problem is that the interpretation of "distinct kicking motion" has been established such that all of the goals that have been shown have "some" kicking motion but apparently not a "distinct" kicking motion. If you want to eliminate all goals where there is "any" kicking motion then change the rule and enforce it that way. But don't interpret it one way and then change course when it's late in the third period of a tied playoff game and the ruling on the ice is a goal.

[topfiverecords]

Such a wide gap between:
A. Puck is completely still. Player is completely still. Player swings foot to propel flat and still puck over the goal line.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Z. Puck was in the air, heading over the goal line at speed and lands on the ice just prior to the goal line. Player is heading into the net at speed. Player's foot in motion touches puck also in motion.

It's like the goal we had called back (maybe last season?) for batting the puck into the net with a hand, when actually the player was just moving his body and hand into position to get into the path of the shot in order to create a deflection and the timing was so close that command twisted it into directing the puck in with the hand.

They're just not that intelligent.

[Geeoff]

Originally Posted by tvp2003

https://twitter.com/user/status/1530232100640608256

Nope. Still doesn't explain how it is a "distinct kicking motion". Saying it doesn't make it so.

IMO, the way the rule is drafted is sufficient; the problem is that the interpretation of "distinct kicking motion" has been established such that all of the goals that have been shown have "some" kicking motion but apparently not a "distinct" kicking motion. If you want to eliminate all goals where there is "any" kicking motion then change the rule and enforce it that way. But don't interpret it one way and then change course when it's late in the third period of a tied playoff game and the ruling on the ice is a goal.

there should not be any "we felt"s in a rule like this.

[neo45]

I think it’s self-evident that it’s a bad call just by the controversy around the hockey world

If it needs to DISTINCT and CONCLUSIVE to take a goal off the scoreboard, then, why do a shocking amount of people involved in the game feel this was neither?

[djsFlames]

Haven't weighed in at all on CP since our season was ended

What can you say? The NHL got what they wanted: McDavid in the final four.

Flames probably don't pull out the series with their inability to protect leads, but they deserved better there, 1000%. The puck was already on it's way in and would've entered the net because of inertia and being out of reach of any one that could stop it in time. It would've gone in whether nudged by the skate or not.

And Coleman was in the process of falling essentially. It looks kicked, but he was also doing a natural motion with his legs and that's such a split second moment i don't know how much of that can be calculated.

It wasn't altered in direction by the skate, it was just pushed in the direction it was already sliding and nothing was stopping it from crossing. It's like hauling down a guy streaking in on an empty net a foot away from the line where there's essentially zero doubt he would've missed, and blowing the play down and not awarding him the goal.

That has to be a goal. It is a goal. Flames should've been up with a few minutes left.

This is nothing new for how this team is treated in do or die situations.

Bennett and Galinas deserved more consideration, and this wasn't even comparable to those instances. It's a goal, it's a goal, it's a goal.

There are legitimate problems with how decisions are being made, and it looks like logic and common sense have been discarded entirely.

Guys in Toronto should feel like dicks today.

I don't think I'm pouring a cent into this league for a while. I'd like to see my team treated with the respect and "benefit of the doubt" that Edmonton seems to garner. That is to say, there should be no edge or advantage to certain teams and it has consistently felt like there has been.

Not interested in a league of disparity, unpredictable standards and underlying agendas. Nor shoving gambling down the throats of its audiences.

Ps. Edmonton should have never had that 4th first overall if the league had the modicum of sense to implement the draft rules when it actually mattered - to impede that team from taking advantage.

Nothing left for this product but apathy.

[CGY12]

Originally Posted by tvp2003

https://twitter.com/user/status/1530232100640608256

Nope. Still doesn't explain how it is a "distinct kicking motion". Saying it doesn't make it so.

IMO, the way the rule is drafted is sufficient; the problem is that the interpretation of "distinct kicking motion" has been established such that all of the goals that have been shown have "some" kicking motion but apparently not a "distinct" kicking motion. If you want to eliminate all goals where there is "any" kicking motion then change the rule and enforce it that way. But don't interpret it one way and then change course when it's late in the third period of a tied playoff game and the ruling on the ice is a goal.

To summarize:go oilers go.

Common sense fails again. Bush league.

[Flames0910]

Everything Colin Campbell touches turns to crap.

[Coach]

Originally Posted by Flames0910

The clear lesson is to be a better tv market or have superstar power the league can market.

Apparently two of the best American-born players of the past few decades doesn’t count.

[Flames0910]

Originally Posted by Coach

Apparently two of the best American-born players of the past few decades doesn’t count.

Not when you're a small market team in Canada. Americans couldn't even pin us on a map if they tried.

[Wormius]

Reviews should be based on the speed of human response. Not slowed down by 1/1000th speed and nitpicked.

[Royle9]

Colon McDavid can justify it all he wants, what matters is the call on the ice was a goal, the review was NOT enough to reverse it.

It was also going in either way so its impact is almost 0.

Bull#### call to give EDM a chance, and it worked.. exactly what they wanted.

[blankall]

Originally Posted by neo45

I think it’s self-evident that it’s a bad call just by the controversy around the hockey world

If it needs to DISTINCT and CONCLUSIVE to take a goal off the scoreboard, then, why do a shocking amount of people involved in the game feel this was neither?

Exactly. If there's this much debate about it, it's obviously not conclusive. This wasn't a chance to re-evaluate the on-ice call. The call had been made, and the process states there must be conclusive evidence the other way to overturn that call.

[Coach]

Originally Posted by Flames0910

Not when you're a small market team in Canada. Americans couldn't even pin us on a map if they tried.

Maybe if the NHL could market anyone not named McDavid, they would.

Johnny is an East coast darling, Tkachuk is a legacy player with a big personality. It’s stupid they aren’t marketed harder. Same with a lot of players everywhere. The NHL has a silly habit of only marketing one star.

[djsFlames]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

It came from Toronto. What I don't get is if that's the case, why are refs huddled around Ipads? I guess they are being consulted as well? If so, what do they do - vote?

I also think that on something like this, slo-mo replay is a huge and often misleading factor. All the things Coleman would have had to decide and do - watch it in real time and see if you think that could actually happen, even for a pro athlete.

Good point. Looking deliberate in slo-mo doesn't equal being deliberate in real time. The Matrix bullet time isn't a thing people do in real life.

How much can you calculate and execute in 0.2 seconds.

[PaperBagger'14]

I didnt expect the flames to win the series, but after the situation room called down and disallowed that goal, that told me everything I need to know about my fandom from this point on.

I don't know why I let myself emotionally invest in a product that has a clear agenda and will break the spirit of the game to enforce it. I look at that goal last night and everything about it reeks of collusion. Now I don't normally buy into conspiracies but between this and 2004 I completely believe that the game is 100% rigged come playoff time.

With that said, I will still watch games from home or when I go out, but i am going to make a conscious effort to watch fewer of them. I will never pay for a ticket to a game, a jersey, 50/50's or any NHL related product again. Last night was completely belligerent and inexcusable. The NHL can pound sand.

[djsFlames]

Illegal streams only for me. Not a cent on merchandise anytime in the near future.

Up yours SN and NHL.