Kicking motion

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by The Cobra

I think propelled means to cause it to occur which is not allowed. A deflection is not "propelled".

A deflection is allowed. All kinds of goals have neem directed in, and propelled. A nudge with the hip, turning the leg towards the net, same with the skate.

Goals are scored REGULARLY by the player directing it in off their body. Then, once in a while, they are disallowed, and we all go through the argument of what is a kicking motion or what is intentionally directed, all over again.

[PaperBagger'14]

It's been how many days now since the disallowed goal and I still have no clue how they came to that decision. Either my understanding of the spirit of the rule is wrong or the NHL situation room is clueless. The way the rule is written it is clearly a goal.

[Scroopy Noopers]

Originally Posted by The Cobra

I think propelled means to cause it to occur which is not allowed. A deflection is not "propelled".

Really didn’t think I had to explain that deflections are fine and thought my word choice covered it anyway…, thanks for making me feel somewhat sane.

[powderjunkie]

Originally Posted by The Cobra

I think propelled means to cause it to occur which is not allowed. A deflection is not "propelled".

If a player is in motion [toward the net] then they could both deflect (richochet) and propel the puck legally...ie. cause it to occur without specific intent.


I'd go black and white and say you can score however you want outside the crease (obviously throwing is already illegal, but I'd be fine with hand-batting), but an offensive player can only legally score with their stick inside the crease.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by powderjunkie

If a player is in motion [toward the net] then they could both deflect (richochet) and propel the puck legally...ie. cause it to occur without specific intent.


I'd go black and white and say you can score however you want outside the crease (obviously throwing is already illegal, but I'd be fine with hand-batting), but an offensive player can only legally score with their stick inside the crease.

If you are standing in the crease, and not interfering with the goalie obviously, you can score by having the puck deflect off your body.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by Scroopy Noopers

Really didn’t think I had to explain that deflections are fine and thought my word choice covered it anyway…, thanks for making me feel somewhat sane.

But your word choice didn't cover it because the rule isn't about 'propelled'. A deflection propels the puck in a different direction.

I don't want to argue with you. I am trying to show that the rule uses language that is highly debatable (likely on purpose). Your original post also seemed to imply that you can only score with your stick, which is of course not at all accurate.

[powderjunkie]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

If you are standing in the crease, and not interfering with the goalie obviously, you can score by having the puck deflect off your body.

I'm saying how I'd change the rule: total anarchy outside the crease; stick only inside the crease.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by powderjunkie

I'm saying how I'd change the rule: total anarchy outside the crease; stick only inside the crease.

So no deflections off an offensive player no matter how accidental?

You could go the other way and allow all goals not done with some other illegal play (eg hand/high stick) subject to dangerous plays not being allowed, like in soccer where you can’t do a scissor kick if it’s near another player’s head.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

So no deflections off an offensive player no matter how accidental?

You could go the other way and allow all goals not done with some other illegal play (eg hand/high stick) subject to dangerous plays not being allowed, like in soccer where you can’t do a scissor kick if it’s near another player’s head.

That's all it takes.

Allow everything, except for the hand, subject to dangerous plays not being allowed.

In 50+ years of playing and watching hockey, I have never seen a kick, not a dangerous one. but if it happens, disallow it.

IMO, if you can direct a puck into the net with your skate - good on ya! NHL goalies are good.

[Steveyoto]

What is the big deal with any form of deflection? I would assume that 'kicking' is not allowed due to safety. not to mention that it is very hard to kick a puck. Sharp skates kicking at pucks is not safe. However, what transpired was not unsafe, which is what I believe to be the spirit of the rule. This stuff drives me nuts.

[Weitz]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

That's all it takes.

Allow everything, except for the hand, subject to dangerous plays not being allowed.

In 50+ years of playing and watching hockey, I have never seen a kick, not a dangerous one. but if it happens, disallow it.

IMO, if you can direct a puck into the net with your skate - good on ya! NHL goalies are good.

You’ve never seen a kick? Or just a dangerous one?

Agreed. Get rid of the stupid rule.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by Weitz

You’ve never seen a kick? Or just a dangerous one?

Agreed. Get rid of the stupid rule.

I have never seen a full on soccer kick - at least not since novice.

I have never seen a dangerous kick either - at least not a kick at the puck

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Steveyoto

What is the big deal with any form of deflection? I would assume that 'kicking' is not allowed due to safety. not to mention that it is very hard to kick a puck. Sharp skates kicking at pucks is not safe. However, what transpired was not unsafe, which is what I believe to be the spirit of the rule. This stuff drives me nuts.

The thing that makes the safety argument invalid is that you can kick in the crease, as long as a goal isn’t scored right from the kick. You can kick to your stick, kick to a teammate, kick to stop a puck if you’re a defender. Hell, you can even kick the puck at the net as long as it goes off someone else first. All perfectly legal.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

I have never seen a full on soccer kick - at least not since novice.

I have never seen a dangerous kick either - at least not a kick at the puck

I don’t think injuries like the Malarchuk one were kicks at the puck either. Falling players I think.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

I don’t think injuries like the Malarchuk one were kicks at the puck either. Falling guess players I think.

Yes, had nothing to do with a kick

[powderjunkie]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

So no deflections off an offensive player no matter how accidental?

You could go the other way and allow all goals not done with some other illegal play (eg hand/high stick) subject to dangerous plays not being allowed, like in soccer where you can’t do a scissor kick if it’s near another player’s head.

Stay outta the crease...

The league has demonstrated consistent incompetence with subjective calls. So make the rules objective.

A problem with my idea is pucks that are airborne...but the overhead view should generally help you determine the vertical plane of the crease...and if it's inconclusive then the call on the ice stands.

Another challenge would be 'how' you came to be in the crease (ie. pushed by an opponent)...I need to chew more on that one. Disincentivizing being right in the crease might also help reduce subjective GI reviews

[Shazam]

That’s just Brett Hull in Dallas all over again.

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

Originally Posted by Shazam

That’s just Brett Hull in Dallas all over again.

It's not, though. You're allowed to be in the crease when the goal goes in, so long as you're not a) interfering with the goaltender or b) scoring the goal using something other than your stick.

It's conceivable that under that suggested rule there will be a disallowed goal where a puck happens to go in off of an attacking player's skate that's barely in the crease and nowhere near the goalie, of course. You just have to decide if you're okay with that being called back or not.

[powderjunkie]

It wouldn't eliminate really close calls, but it would make the decision criteria a lot less subjective. More importantly, it would change player behaviour a bit - a little less net crashing and once there.

Speaking of the Hull goal, it would continue the grand tradition of simply changing the rule to retroactively fixing the rules to accommodate a blown call

[Cecil Terwilliger]

But the hull call was correct. Players were always allowed in the crease if they were playing the puck, which Hull was prior to entering the crease and scoring.