Did you see this weird ending in hockey?

[Deleted]

The second video shows it up close at :49. I do not know the rules however, it looks like a butt goal to me.

www.sportingnews.com/nhl/story/2013-12-23/mike-smith-goal-sabres-pants-shorts-phoenix-coyotes

[Deleted]

I seen it on tv. Dumb rule.

[Deleted]

Dec 24, 2013 9:26:23 GMT -5 @theref said:

I seen it on tv. Dumb rule.

So was it the right call??? What is the rule?

[Deleted]

Dec 24, 2013 9:32:34 GMT -5 @buckina said:

Dec 24, 2013 9:26:23 GMT -5 @theref said:

I seen it on tv. Dumb rule.

So was it the right call??? What is the rule?

According to report it is....
I'm guessing anytime the puck enters counts...

To me the puck should have been the basketball version of a "dead ball"

[Deleted]

Dec 24, 2013 9:55:26 GMT -5 @theref said:

Dec 24, 2013 9:32:34 GMT -5 @buckina said:

So was it the right call??? What is the rule?

According to report it is....
I'm guessing anytime the puck enters counts...

To me the puck should have been the basketball version of a "dead ball"

Good point. I thought something like that too. It was not technically in play.

[Deleted]

Dec 24, 2013 10:16:11 GMT -5 @buckina said:

Dec 24, 2013 9:55:26 GMT -5 @theref said:

According to report it is....
I'm guessing anytime the puck enters counts...

To me the puck should have been the basketball version of a "dead ball"

Good point. I thought something like that too. It was not technically in play.

Yeah in basketball if the ball lodges between rim and backboard it is a "held ball" and you go to the AP arrow. I would think the puck lodging in someone's pants would go to a face off. But they reported the correct call was made allowing the goal. I understand allowing any ricochet's or errant passes being allowed but not this in the pants deal. 

[TH1Bucks]

Dec 24, 2013 13:08:11 GMT -5 @theref said:

Dec 24, 2013 10:16:11 GMT -5 @buckina said:

Good point. I thought something like that too. It was not technically in play.

Yeah in basketball if the ball lodges between rim and backboard it is a "held ball" and you go to the AP arrow. I would think the puck lodging in someone's pants would go to a face off. But they reported the correct call was made allowing the goal. I understand allowing any ricochet's or errant passes being allowed but not this in the pants deal. 

What if somehow the got caught inside, past the cylinder on the netting ? I would say its a basket. In Hockey it was in play. The rule in hockey does not allow for what ifs. Too many variables and it happens very fast. If it crosses the line AND the ref/replay can confirm, its a goal. If the ref loses site of the puck, blows the whistle its a dead puck, no goal. In this case the Ref seen the puck the whole way then confirmed on video. Nice & the Correct call.

[Deleted]

Dec 27, 2013 15:43:54 GMT -5 TH1Bucks said:

Dec 24, 2013 13:08:11 GMT -5 @theref said:

Yeah in basketball if the ball lodges between rim and backboard it is a "held ball" and you go to the AP arrow. I would think the puck lodging in someone's pants would go to a face off. But they reported the correct call was made allowing the goal. I understand allowing any ricochet's or errant passes being allowed but not this in the pants deal. 

What if somehow the got caught inside, past the cylinder on the netting ? I would say its a basket. In Hockey it was in play. The rule in hockey does not allow for what ifs. Too many variables and it happens very fast. If it crosses the line AND the ref/replay can confirm, its a goal. If the ref loses site of the puck, blows the whistle its a dead puck, no goal. In this case the Ref seen the puck the whole way then confirmed on video. Nice & the Correct call.

I realize correct call, but this is a puck stuck in the jersey and the player/defender backing into the goal with it. I'll use a different analogy. A baseball player cannot record a fly ball out with his hat. Like I said, I understand ricochets and bad passes etc. counting but not this. And if somehow a basketball was shot and the net was so tight the ball went in, past the cylinder and the net caused the ball to somehow bounce back up out of the cylinder, it would not be a goal. Hard to compare two totally different sports. I think I am correct in saying if the goalie had not backed into the goal they would have ruled face off?? Would an offensive player be allowed to push the goalie into the net and score the goal?  

[TH1Bucks]

SRY for the delay Brotha, we had to say goodbye to my Uncle who passed on the 23rd..Full Military Vet Honors with a Dove at the end.. Very Nice way to say thank you and GoodBye for now...

If the puck had lodged inside his pants, pads etc and not on top of his jersey the ref would have lost site of the puck and whistled the play dead. At this point he most likely would have went for replay confirmation from Toronto looking for clear evidence the puck did or did not cross the line before the whistle blew like he did in this case. Once they lose site of the puck they usually give an internal 3 seconds before whistling the play dead. This judgment call/timer is determined by the play in front of the net. If the Goalie is being whacked at or pushed around it should be a quicker whistle. They use 2 ref's due to the speed of the game.

To answer your Q's.
Correct, If the goalie had not backed up the play would have been whistled for a face off. IE the puck would have never crossed the red line.
NO a player can not intentionally push a goalie into the net. Had a offensive player pushed him with incidental contact then Yes it could have been considered a good goal. Most plays like that are reviewed from the NHL Home Base in Toronto Canada by a single set of replay officials. Something I think ALL Professional sports with replays should do. This gives more continuity to the calls at hand.

In this case the ref seen the puck the entire way confirming by going behind the net, seeing the puck IN the net ON the goalies Jersey then confirming with replay officials in Toronto.

I was not aware that a BaseBall player could not catch a baseball with his hat. Thought anyway the ball was caught without hitting the ground was an out.

Also thought when the Basketball passed completely thru the cylinder it was a good basket. I know that if a player hits the ball after it passes thru or during the " act " of its goaltending and counts.

Curious on what sport you Ref ?

[victor2111]

it is hard to compare this to basketball or baseball play, a sport like that. A better comparison would be Soccer.

If the goalie makes the save in Soccer but then trips on his own feet and falls backward into the net with the ball in his hands, it is still a goal, right?

Something like that.

[Deleted]

I officiate the big 3 in high school. 21 years in basketball, 9 years in baseball and 7 in football. I'm still undecided on my return to baseball as it is by far my least favorite. I have been the training officer in basketball for the last 6 years.

Condolences on your loss.

[Deleted]

It is, but if the ball goes down the goalies shorts a new rule would have to be created. Also, that would be impressive.

[Deleted]

I know very little about hockey and soccer

[TH1Bucks]

Thanks Ref ! He had been sick for a long time. Stroke 18 years ago left him paralyzed on the left side then diabetes then cancer & complete shutdown. He refused medication when he found out about the cancer. Liquid morphine for the pain was all. One strong SOB !

I know very little about Soccer. Cisco is our resident soccer expert correct ? Where is that MOFO ?

[victor2111]

Very sorry to hear about your loss, TH1!