Kicking rule
#1
Posted 17 March 2012 - 04:09 PM
Simple black and white.
#2
Posted 17 March 2012 - 04:21 PM

2012 Eastern Conference Champions
#3
Posted 17 March 2012 - 05:24 PM
Not as if its unfair like grabbing the puck with ur glove and throw it in the net, its still pretty hard to do.
www.SterioDesign.com
Who is it gonna be?

#4
Posted 17 March 2012 - 05:37 PM
imo they should just make it count always, if you're skilled enough to score with your feet well good for you, it's gonna take away that grey zone.
Not as if its unfair like grabbing the puck with ur glove and throw it in the net, its still pretty hard to do.
It needs to be one way or the other.. This grey area is total BS as its pretty much up to the reviewers to decide what they want.. Still don't know how we got that call against the Ducks.. I'm assuming the normal guy was off taking a dump so some intern filled in

Devils Fan since 1989
~~~
Season Ticket Holder since '08 - '09
Section 226 - Row 2 - Seats 15 and 16
~~~
#5
Posted 17 March 2012 - 06:01 PM
The New Jersey Devils win Stanley Cups everywhere:
-NHL record for most road wins in the playoffs - 10-1 in '95 and 10-2 in '00
-NHL record for most home wins in the playoffs - 12-1 in '03
#6
Posted 17 March 2012 - 06:04 PM
#7
Posted 17 March 2012 - 06:21 PM
#8
Posted 17 March 2012 - 07:43 PM
If a player makes any movement towards the net OR the puck with his skate, and makes contact with the puck, it shouldn't count. If a player is gliding towards the net, and the puck hits his STATIONARY foot, then count it.
Imo
Edited by Devilsfan118, 17 March 2012 - 07:44 PM.

-This is Team-
Anyone who says, ‘You played in that New York area,’ I say, ‘No, I played in New Jersey.’ - Ken Daneyko
#9
Posted 17 March 2012 - 08:02 PM
#10
Posted 17 March 2012 - 08:08 PM
If the Parise game tying goal agains the Isles in the final seconds was waived off, then so should this one.
are you serious? c'mon now lets not act like dumb homers, take off those blinders man. You guys have to get over that goal, it was NOT a good goal it was the right call.
Zach PUSHED the puck (which was stopped or close) with his skate just like you push a carrot slice you just sliced with a knife.
Cooke goal was deflected off his skate, he had his skate at the right angle, he "MAY" have gave a little heel swing but not enough to overturn the call.
its not the same situation so stop comparing
Edited by SterioDesign, 17 March 2012 - 08:08 PM.
www.SterioDesign.com
Who is it gonna be?

#11
Posted 18 March 2012 - 11:33 PM
--John Buccigross
#12
Posted 18 March 2012 - 11:50 PM
As a hockey player I disagree with this. Many goals are scored off of deflections from the skate. I like it the way it is because IMO it is obvious when a player deliberately kicks in a puck. Toronto just needs to be more consistent with their rulings.I've been saying this for years. Either allow all of them or disallow all of them, at least then we would have consistency.
Brilliant explanationZach PUSHED the puck (which was stopped or close) with his skate just like you push a carrot slice you just sliced with a knife.
Edited by Zubie#8, 18 March 2012 - 11:54 PM.
“I think winning against them in the big stage, not just for me, but for the fans of New Jersey, people that are supporting us and always take a second seat to these guys for whatever reason, now they’ve got to be pretty happy going to work and going to school and doing all their things that they do." - Martin Brodeur
#13
Posted 19 March 2012 - 12:04 AM
Personally I'd be in favor of going back to 1 ref and letting that ref view and make the final call on all instant replay situations (like in the NFL). Eliminate the war room in Toronto. One person should be responsible for all officiating decisions within a single game.
#14
Posted 19 March 2012 - 12:35 AM
If the player skate (like Cooke) is making any motion that helps the puck get into the net then its a no goal. Cooke clearly turned his skate in a way that helped the puck get into the net.
If the player is standing and the puck hits his skate and get in then its a goal. You can't start taking away goals that get in after hitting standing players who can't really see it coming and don't have any control on where it does hit them.

of Henrik Tallinder
of The Eric Lindros Concussions
#15
Posted 19 March 2012 - 07:19 AM
I think its more of motion than kicking motion.
If the player skate (like Cooke) is making any motion that helps the puck get into the net then its a no goal. Cooke clearly turned his skate in a way that helped the puck get into the net.
I'll agree with this part. (maybe they should bring back the crease rule too where any skate or anything else is on light blue paint when the puck crosses - no goal. but they wouldn't do that...it'd 'inhibit scoring', like all these 10 goal games we were supposed to see wen they changed the rules

2012 Eastern Conference Champions
#16
Posted 19 March 2012 - 08:10 AM
I think its more of motion than kicking motion.
If the player skate (like Cooke) is making any motion that helps the puck get into the net then its a no goal. Cooke clearly turned his skate in a way that helped the puck get into the net.
If the player is standing and the puck hits his skate and get in then its a goal. You can't start taking away goals that get in after hitting standing players who can't really see it coming and don't have any control on where it does hit them.
Yeah I totally agree with this.. Its the using of the skate to put the puck in the net that should be outlawed.. What makes kicking a puck in so different from redirecting it in? It's still using your skate to put the puck in the net, what makes one motion illegal but the other okay?

Devils Fan since 1989
~~~
Season Ticket Holder since '08 - '09
Section 226 - Row 2 - Seats 15 and 16
~~~
#17
Posted 19 March 2012 - 09:18 AM
#18
Posted 19 March 2012 - 09:30 AM
Yeah I totally agree with this.. Its the using of the skate to put the puck in the net that should be outlawed.. What makes kicking a puck in so different from redirecting it in? It's still using your skate to put the puck in the net, what makes one motion illegal but the other okay?
we might as well rename the game to "ice soccer"

2012 Eastern Conference Champions
#19
Posted 19 March 2012 - 10:07 AM
--John Buccigross
#20
Posted 19 March 2012 - 11:09 AM
If the Parise game tying goal agains the Isles in the final seconds was waived off, then so should this one.
No clue how Cooke's goal is allowed but a few of our skate goals were not this season. Theres been so much inconsistency with video review, and officiating in general, this year.
are you serious? c'mon now lets not act like dumb homers, take off those blinders man. You guys have to get over that goal, it was NOT a good goal it was the right call.
Zach PUSHED the puck (which was stopped or close) with his skate just like you push a carrot slice you just sliced with a knife.
Cooke goal was deflected off his skate, he had his skate at the right angle, he "MAY" have gave a little heel swing but not enough to overturn the call.
its not the same situation so stop comparing
They were almost completely identical. And, brilliant analogy with the carrots...
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users













