OOTS 11/12 playoff edition
Moderator: Referees
Re: OOTS 11/12 playoff edition
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.
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.
I'm amazed that so many people choose to be complete twats.
Re: OOTS 11/12 playoff edition
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.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.
Too bad he couldn't shoot with that power from the opponent's zone, although with that accuracy it mightn't have mattered.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.
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.
Re: OOTS 11/12 playoff edition
You're right.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.
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.
I'm amazed that so many people choose to be complete twats.
- Cookie La Rue
- MVP
- Posts: 2386
- Joined: Mon Aug 09, 2004 10:57 pm
- Location: 50° 10' North / 8° 34' East
Re: OOTS 11/12 playoff edition
Even Bert can't be that moronic, can he? He'll be the last one to do something similar again.Arachnid wrote:Well....there is secret weapon 44....just say's...
Just imagine what had happened if Weber had fuckin' broken Zetterberg's neck.
"Every dog has its day." - CC Hockey Pool Champion 2004 & 2013 'Moves like Lenarduzzi'
Re: OOTS 11/12 playoff edition
I'm sure that Zetterberg is "Just happy to be alive"™Cookie La Rue wrote:Just imagine what had happened if Weber had fuckin' broken Zetterberg's neck.
Doc: "BTW, Donny was right, you're smug."
- Hockey Widow
- CC Legend
- Posts: 19135
- Joined: Sun Jul 10, 2011 8:52 pm
Re: OOTS 11/12 playoff edition
Topper wrote:You're right.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.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
Re: OOTS 11/12 playoff edition
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.
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.
Re: OOTS 11/12 playoff edition
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.
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.
- Hockey Widow
- CC Legend
- Posts: 19135
- Joined: Sun Jul 10, 2011 8:52 pm
Re: OOTS 11/12 playoff edition
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
The only HW the Canucks need
Re: OOTS 11/12 playoff edition
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.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.
Re: OOTS 11/12 playoff edition
What I quoted was from the NHL Rule Book http://www.nhl.com/ice/page.htm?id=26355Hockey 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
The first paragraph is the discretionary part.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.
Over the Internet, you can pretend to be anyone or anything.
I'm amazed that so many people choose to be complete twats.
I'm amazed that so many people choose to be complete twats.
Re: OOTS 11/12 playoff edition
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.
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.
Re: OOTS 11/12 playoff edition
From the D zone it is automatic, anywhere else is ref's discretion.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.
Over the Internet, you can pretend to be anyone or anything.
I'm amazed that so many people choose to be complete twats.
I'm amazed that so many people choose to be complete twats.
Re: OOTS 11/12 playoff edition
Remove the reference to D zone,
& the first paragraph is still ridiculous.
& the first paragraph is still ridiculous.
Re: OOTS 11/12 playoff edition
May I recommend reading comprehension 101.clem wrote:Remove the reference to D zone,
& the first paragraph is still ridiculous.
Over the Internet, you can pretend to be anyone or anything.
I'm amazed that so many people choose to be complete twats.
I'm amazed that so many people choose to be complete twats.