OOTS 11/12 playoff edition

Welcome to the main forum of our site. Anything and everything to do with the Vancouver Canucks is dicussed and debated here.

Moderator: Referees

Re: OOTS 11/12 playoff edition

Postby Topper » Fri Apr 13, 2012 9:53 am

No, the benches do not count because the glass is recessed back into the crowd. A rising shot that would hit the glass elsewhere may clear the glass at the benches. Allen's call (he should have gotten award for clearing the glass at the far end, what a shot), was because the shot originated in the Vancouver zone.

I thought Stoll was targeting the bench.
Over the Internet, you can pretend to be anyone or anything.

I'm amazed that so many people choose to be complete twats.
User avatar
Topper
CC Legend
 
Posts: 5031
Joined: Wed Sep 15, 2004 8:11 pm
Location: Earth, most days.

Re: OOTS 11/12 playoff edition

Postby dbr » Fri Apr 13, 2012 10:08 am

Topper wrote:No, the benches do not count because the glass is recessed back into the crowd. A rising shot that would hit the glass elsewhere may clear the glass at the benches.


The rule specifically states that clearing the glass behind the bench is a penalty, not that I would be surprised for the league to allow refs to use their discretion there and tie their hands on pucks clearing any of the rest of the glass.

Allen's call (he should have gotten award for clearing the glass at the far end, what a shot), was because the shot originated in the Vancouver zone.


Too bad he couldn't shoot with that power from the opponent's zone, although with that accuracy it mightn't have mattered.

But yeah I was perhaps not clear on that, the puck going over the glass anywhere is a penalty, as long as it came off the stick (or hand or whatever) of a player in their own zone.
dbr
CC Hall of Fan Member
 
Posts: 2570
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2011 5:37 pm

Re: OOTS 11/12 playoff edition

Postby Topper » Fri Apr 13, 2012 11:12 am

dbr wrote:The rule specifically states that clearing the glass behind the bench is a penalty, not that I would be surprised for the league to allow refs to use their discretion there and tie their hands on pucks clearing any of the rest of the glass.

You're right.
When any player, while in his defending zone, shoots or bats (using his hand or his stick) the puck directly (non-deflected) out of the playing surface, except where there is no glass, a penalty shall be assessed for delaying the game. When the puck is shot into the players’ bench, the penalty will not apply. When the puck is shot over the glass ‘behind’ the players’ bench, the penalty will be assessed.
Over the Internet, you can pretend to be anyone or anything.

I'm amazed that so many people choose to be complete twats.
User avatar
Topper
CC Legend
 
Posts: 5031
Joined: Wed Sep 15, 2004 8:11 pm
Location: Earth, most days.

Re: OOTS 11/12 playoff edition

Postby Cookie La Rue » Fri Apr 13, 2012 12:20 pm

Arachnid wrote:Well....there is secret weapon 44....just say's... 8-)

Even Bert can't be that moronic, can he? He'll be the last one to do something similar again.
Just imagine what had happened if Weber had fuckin' broken Zetterberg's neck.
"Every dog has its day." - CC Hockey Pool Champion 2004 & 2013
User avatar
Cookie La Rue
MVP
MVP
 
Posts: 1822
Joined: Mon Aug 09, 2004 10:57 pm
Location: 50° 10' North / 8° 34' East

Re: OOTS 11/12 playoff edition

Postby Cornuck » Fri Apr 13, 2012 1:27 pm

Cookie La Rue wrote:Just imagine what had happened if Weber had fuckin' broken Zetterberg's neck.


I'm sure that Zetterberg is "Just happy to be alive"™ :D
Over 40 years of pain - I just want one day of glory.
User avatar
Cornuck
Moderator & MVP
Moderator & MVP
 
Posts: 4891
Joined: Mon Aug 09, 2004 11:39 am
Location: Chester, NE

Re: OOTS 11/12 playoff edition

Postby Hockey Widow » Fri Apr 13, 2012 1:57 pm

Topper wrote:
dbr wrote:The rule specifically states that clearing the glass behind the bench is a penalty, not that I would be surprised for the league to allow refs to use their discretion there and tie their hands on pucks clearing any of the rest of the glass.

You're right.
When any player, while in his defending zone, shoots or bats (using his hand or his stick) the puck directly (non-deflected) out of the playing surface, except where there is no glass, a penalty shall be assessed for delaying the game. When the puck is shot into the players’ bench, the penalty will not apply. When the puck is shot over the glass ‘behind’ the players’ bench, the penalty will be assessed.



I get all of that but my question was, is all discretion gone? To me Stoll intentionally shot the puck over the boards and aimed for the benches so as not to get an automatic penalty. Is the rule now so black and white that the refs can no longer give a penalty for intentional delay of game? Is there a separate rule I guess is what I am asking.
The only HW the Canucks need
User avatar
Hockey Widow
CC Legend
 
Posts: 4281
Joined: Sun Jul 10, 2011 8:52 pm

Re: OOTS 11/12 playoff edition

Postby dbr » Fri Apr 13, 2012 2:23 pm

There's a rule for intentional clearing (regardless of whether the player is in his own zone or not) out of play and it's not specific to clearing it over the glass.

That being said the penalty is for the intent so the refs need to put their Ron McLean glasses on to figure out what the offending player was thinking when they did it.
Last edited by dbr on Fri Apr 13, 2012 2:29 pm, edited 2 times in total.
dbr
CC Hall of Fan Member
 
Posts: 2570
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2011 5:37 pm

Re: OOTS 11/12 playoff edition

Postby mathonwy » Fri Apr 13, 2012 2:28 pm

Will Pittsburgh even up the series tonight? The first period of last game was an incredibly dominating one by the Pens.

Then, the Flyers took over after the blown offside goal by Briere.

Should be a good one.

I can't fathom the Pens going back to Philly down 2-0.
User avatar
mathonwy
CC Hall of Fan Member
 
Posts: 2103
Joined: Tue Jul 12, 2011 1:53 pm

Re: OOTS 11/12 playoff edition

Postby Hockey Widow » Fri Apr 13, 2012 2:29 pm

dbr wrote:There's a rule for intentional clearing (regardless of whether the player is in his own zone or not I would thing) out of play and it's not specific to clearing it over the glass.

That being said the penalty is for the intent so the refs need to put their Ron McLean glasses on to figure out what the offending player was thinking when they did it.



OK, thanks. I don't need to be Ron McLean to KNOW it was intentional :D :D
The only HW the Canucks need
User avatar
Hockey Widow
CC Legend
 
Posts: 4281
Joined: Sun Jul 10, 2011 8:52 pm

Re: OOTS 11/12 playoff edition

Postby Meds » Fri Apr 13, 2012 2:58 pm

mathonwy wrote:Will Pittsburgh even up the series tonight? The first period of last game was an incredibly dominating one by the Pens.

Then, the Flyers took over after the blown offside goal by Briere.

Should be a good one.

I can't fathom the Pens going back to Philly down 2-0.


I think the Flyers are a much better team than most people, myself included, thought. If the series goes back to Philly with the Flyer's up 2-0, it will be over in 6 games max.
User avatar
Meds
CC Legend
 
Posts: 3471
Joined: Mon Jul 11, 2011 8:50 pm

Re: OOTS 11/12 playoff edition

Postby Topper » Fri Apr 13, 2012 3:03 pm

Hockey Widow wrote:
dbr wrote:There's a rule for intentional clearing (regardless of whether the player is in his own zone or not I would thing) out of play and it's not specific to clearing it over the glass.

That being said the penalty is for the intent so the refs need to put their Ron McLean glasses on to figure out what the offending player was thinking when they did it.



OK, thanks. I don't need to be Ron McLean to KNOW it was intentional :D :D

What I quoted was from the NHL Rule Book http://www.nhl.com/ice/page.htm?id=26355

A minor penalty for delay of game shall be imposed on any player or goalkeeper who deliberately shoots or bats (using his hand or his stick) the puck outside the playing area during the play or after a stoppage of play.

When any player, while in his defending zone, shoots or bats (using his hand or his stick) the puck directly (non-deflected) out of the playing surface, except where there is no glass, a penalty shall be assessed for delaying the game. When the puck is shot into the players’ bench, the penalty will not apply. When the puck is shot over the glass ‘behind’ the players’ bench, the penalty will be assessed.


The first paragraph is the discretionary part.
Over the Internet, you can pretend to be anyone or anything.

I'm amazed that so many people choose to be complete twats.
User avatar
Topper
CC Legend
 
Posts: 5031
Joined: Wed Sep 15, 2004 8:11 pm
Location: Earth, most days.

Re: OOTS 11/12 playoff edition

Postby clem » Fri Apr 13, 2012 3:21 pm

The wording of the first paragraph is ridiculous.

Since deliberately shooting the puck out of the playing area from their D zone is cause for a penalty, & players don’t want to be penalized, it’s not rational to assume that players intentionally do this.

Bush league.
User avatar
clem
CC 1st Team All-Star
 
Posts: 543
Joined: Wed Nov 23, 2011 10:45 am

Re: OOTS 11/12 playoff edition

Postby Topper » Fri Apr 13, 2012 3:25 pm

clem wrote:The wording of the first paragraph is ridiculous.

Since deliberately shooting the puck out of the playing area from their D zone is cause for a penalty, & players don’t want to be penalized, it’s not rational to assume that players intentionally do this.

Bush league.

From the D zone it is automatic, anywhere else is ref's discretion.
Over the Internet, you can pretend to be anyone or anything.

I'm amazed that so many people choose to be complete twats.
User avatar
Topper
CC Legend
 
Posts: 5031
Joined: Wed Sep 15, 2004 8:11 pm
Location: Earth, most days.

Re: OOTS 11/12 playoff edition

Postby clem » Fri Apr 13, 2012 3:27 pm

Remove the reference to D zone,

& the first paragraph is still ridiculous.
User avatar
clem
CC 1st Team All-Star
 
Posts: 543
Joined: Wed Nov 23, 2011 10:45 am

Re: OOTS 11/12 playoff edition

Postby Topper » Fri Apr 13, 2012 3:29 pm

clem wrote:Remove the reference to D zone,

& the first paragraph is still ridiculous.

May I recommend reading comprehension 101.
Over the Internet, you can pretend to be anyone or anything.

I'm amazed that so many people choose to be complete twats.
User avatar
Topper
CC Legend
 
Posts: 5031
Joined: Wed Sep 15, 2004 8:11 pm
Location: Earth, most days.

PreviousNext

Return to Canucks Corner Chat

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Baidu [Spider], Meds, Yahoo [Bot] and 3 guests