I think the NHL needs to look at these goals with more scrutiny... video reviewing all of them.
I think Forseberg's goal last night should stand because he makes no contact with his stick on the goalie up high... but, for example, Carolina's Svechnikov goal against Calgary should be reviewed and should be disallowed because his stick hits Dave in the head. If, at any time, your stick goes higher than the crossbar or makes contact with the goalie's head - the goal should be disallowed.
I'm fine with both, the reason Dave gets hit in the head is that his head is below the bar, ergo it's not a high stick.
Pretty soon someone's gonna figure it's dangerous to have metal blades on your feet and some segment of the fanbase will demand that hockey be played in shoes for everyone's safety.
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to TheSquatch For This Useful Post:
Its a phase. Like rock & roll or the smart phone. Eventually the kids will get tired of creative ways to play the puck and keep their sticks on the ice. Like my Dad and his Dad before him.
The Following 7 Users Say Thank You to Toonage For This Useful Post:
It's definitely a bit of a game changer for goalies and defenseman. I've noticed recently that the flames stack a guy on the far post when there's an opponent behind the net; not sure if that's a safe guard against these goals, or if that's always been a strategy and I just haven't noticed before.
It's entertaining when guys figure out new and creative ways to score, so I don't think we should be policing it too closely.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by snipetype
k im just not going to respond to your #### anymore because i have better things to do like #### my model girlfriend rather then try to convince people like you of commonly held hockey knowledge.
Cant be a high stick after the goal unless someone is hit in the head. The play is technically over as soon as the puck crosses the goal line, which would be before the stick goes above the cross bar...
It's definitely a bit of a game changer for goalies and defenseman. I've noticed recently that the flames stack a guy on the far post when there's an opponent behind the net; not sure if that's a safe guard against these goals, or if that's always been a strategy and I just haven't noticed before.
It's entertaining when guys figure out new and creative ways to score, so I don't think we should be policing it too closely.
I'm fine with both, the reason Dave gets hit in the head is that his head is below the bar, ergo it's not a high stick.
Pretty soon someone's gonna figure it's dangerous to have metal blades on your feet and some segment of the fanbase will demand that hockey be played in shoes for everyone's safety.
Below the crossbar has no impact on whether or not a penalty is called for highsticking a player in the head.
The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to Scroopy Noopers For This Useful Post:
What a great goal by Forsberg and he was doing it in full speed. The guy has a tonne of skills. I don't think the league should make up any more rules to stop creativity in scoring any goals IMO. It's tough enough as it is these days to score on big goalies with huge pads. If the stick is not above the crossbar, let it be.
I say get rid of the crossbar rule. Make it shoulder height like everywhere else on the ice. Crossbar is too hard to determine and taller players get an advantage here.
As far as making contact with the goalies head. Is the risk for goalies really that high? Velocity of the stick is low when compared to a slap shot so concussion risk is negligible. Goalies also have a cage so a little tap to the mask won't hurt them.
Let's not go changing rules to eliminate a very exciting play. This type of goal generates millions of views across social media platforms. These types of plays are what helps grow the game.
The Following User Says Thank You to Zoller For This Useful Post:
I say get rid of the crossbar rule. Make it shoulder height like everywhere else on the ice. Crossbar is too hard to determine and taller players get an advantage here.
As far as making contact with the goalies head. Is the risk for goalies really that high? Velocity of the stick is low when compared to a slap shot so concussion risk is negligible. Goalies also have a cage so a little tap to the mask won't hurt them.
Let's not go changing rules to eliminate a very exciting play. This type of goal generates millions of views across social media platforms. These types of plays are what helps grow the game.
I don't think goalies are in danger. On the other hand, flicking a stick at someone's head is going to make them flinch and be less able to make a save. I supposed the argument would be a little like how the Sean Avery distraction by waving his stick in front of goalies' faces was eventually made to be illegal.
I don't think goalies are in danger. On the other hand, flicking a stick at someone's head is going to make them flinch and be less able to make a save. I supposed the argument would be a little like how the Sean Avery distraction by waving his stick in front of goalies' faces was eventually made to be illegal.
I still can't believe Brodeur didn't feed him the business end of his blocker for that.
Below the crossbar has no impact on whether or not a penalty is called for highsticking a player in the head.
Eh, possibly correct in some pedantic way, but utterly irrelevant. As noted, it's not a "high stick" because it's part of the shot. If you are the shooter, you can crank a guy in the head on your follow through.
The rule I was referring to however is the one about high-sticking the puck into the net - 80.3 Disallowed Goal – When an attacking player causes the puck to
enter the opponent’s goal by contacting the puck above the height of
the crossbar, either directly or deflected off any player or official, the
goal shall not be allowed. The determining factor is where the puck
makes contact with the stick. If the puck makes contact with the stick
at or below the level of the crossbar and enters the goal, this goal
shall be allowed.
A goal scored as a result of a defending player striking the puck
with his stick carried above the height of the crossbar of the goal
frame into his own goal shall be allowed.
So I mean, by the rules, this is not a high-sticking play, period.
I say get rid of the crossbar rule. Make it shoulder height like everywhere else on the ice. Crossbar is too hard to determine and taller players get an advantage here.
I've couldn't agree more here. This is what we need in the game. Sorry, i've been advocating for this for years as that's the rule growing up in Minor Hockey and then it changes once Junior hits.
Anyways, back to the high sticking. No. Don't change the rule and keep letting the guys come up with more creative and exiting plays. If a goalie chooses to throw his head into the stick to stop the puck, then it's a good play by him if it stays out. Fully protected.
Imagine this is the Game 7 Stanley cup OT GWG.
Would that change how we look at these goals then?
Not for me. And it really shouldn't for anyone else. They have a good read on things in the NHL. For instance, as awesome as Whites Headbutt goal was, it was called off. It was put in above the crossbar. Generally, these lacrosse wrap around goals, the puck is below the crossbar before it goes in, so no issue.
League needs to not cowtail to every whine and cry from fans.
Same with Chuckys hits. Something need to just be left alone.
Forsberg's Lacrosse style goal
