Thursday, November 17, 2005
Rule 78d
Way back at the end of September, Chris Selley's guest contribution had this bit:
I've been meaning to mention this since it happened in a game I was watching, but the crease is treated specially in at least one circumstance. Here's Rule 78d:
Rather unremarkable in print (and I apologize if this is well-known to everyone but me), but what it means, in conjunction with the rest of Rule 78, is that a goal can be disallowed because of "goaltender interference" without the skater getting a penalty for "goaltender interference".
Or in the old, general sense, the onus remains on the skater to stay out of the goalie's way within the crease, regardless of intent. In areas outside the crease, the skater's intent is key.
Goalies remain untouchable no matter if they're in their crease (which is good for exactly what these days?), in their ridiculous trapezoid or roving around on the white ice.
I've been meaning to mention this since it happened in a game I was watching, but the crease is treated specially in at least one circumstance. Here's Rule 78d:
If (i) a goalkeeper initiates contact with an offensive player who is in the goal crease; and (ii) such contact is (a) initiated by the goalkeeper in order to establish position in his goal crease; and (b) results in an impairment of the goalkeeper's ability to defend his goal, and a goal is scored, the goal will be disallowed.
Rather unremarkable in print (and I apologize if this is well-known to everyone but me), but what it means, in conjunction with the rest of Rule 78, is that a goal can be disallowed because of "goaltender interference" without the skater getting a penalty for "goaltender interference".
Or in the old, general sense, the onus remains on the skater to stay out of the goalie's way within the crease, regardless of intent. In areas outside the crease, the skater's intent is key.
# posted by Matt @ 8:14 pm 
Comments:
I actually just wrote about this with specific reference to the J-Ro/Vokoun shootout incident.
There's a lot more to 78, including some passages concerning contact initiated by the goalie, contact outside the crease, and contact that is deemed to be incidental.
The ref CAN, but is not bound to, disallow goals under most circumstances where contact occurs between skater and goalie. He can take other factors into consideration, so it isn't as cut and dry as the old crease protection rules.
I am all for this. It is getting dangerous to be a goalie. I like that they added Brodeur to the competition committee. Did anyone see Ovechin hit on the goalie. it was not incidental that was pure hit. And not to get penalty jeez and I don't think it was mcgoo messing up the game. I don't want to go go back no goal your skate was near the goalie. I don't want goalies setting picks for there D. I want a easy rule for the refs to call and enforce. Do we have any takers
http://www.nhl.com/hockeyu/rulebook/rule78.html
In terms of a skater running into the goaltender, I would think it also depends on when the infraction occurs. For instance, Alex Ovechkin scores a goal against Carolina, the puck enters the net before contact is made. Ovechkin beats the goalie with a wicked move, but runs right into the goaltender a split second later, knocking the goalie and the net back. Would the goal count, or would the Ref call no goal because of 78. It seems like a lot of gray area here.
Personally, I think that if the goalie is against the side boards he should be fair game. Inside the crease, the goalie should be god; even around the crease the goalie should be free to make a play, but going to the side boards? When he is out there I view him as a skater like any other.
I especially hate when the forechecker is flying in trying to chase down the puck, the goalie goes behind the net and then goes down like he was shot by a smiper the second he feels the pressure on him.
Post a Comment
<< Home
I actually just wrote about this with specific reference to the J-Ro/Vokoun shootout incident.
There's a lot more to 78, including some passages concerning contact initiated by the goalie, contact outside the crease, and contact that is deemed to be incidental.
The ref CAN, but is not bound to, disallow goals under most circumstances where contact occurs between skater and goalie. He can take other factors into consideration, so it isn't as cut and dry as the old crease protection rules.
I am all for this. It is getting dangerous to be a goalie. I like that they added Brodeur to the competition committee. Did anyone see Ovechin hit on the goalie. it was not incidental that was pure hit. And not to get penalty jeez and I don't think it was mcgoo messing up the game. I don't want to go go back no goal your skate was near the goalie. I don't want goalies setting picks for there D. I want a easy rule for the refs to call and enforce. Do we have any takers
http://www.nhl.com/hockeyu/rulebook/rule78.html
# posted by 
: November 18, 2005 7:21 am
: November 18, 2005 7:21 am In terms of a skater running into the goaltender, I would think it also depends on when the infraction occurs. For instance, Alex Ovechkin scores a goal against Carolina, the puck enters the net before contact is made. Ovechkin beats the goalie with a wicked move, but runs right into the goaltender a split second later, knocking the goalie and the net back. Would the goal count, or would the Ref call no goal because of 78. It seems like a lot of gray area here.
Personally, I think that if the goalie is against the side boards he should be fair game. Inside the crease, the goalie should be god; even around the crease the goalie should be free to make a play, but going to the side boards? When he is out there I view him as a skater like any other.
I especially hate when the forechecker is flying in trying to chase down the puck, the goalie goes behind the net and then goes down like he was shot by a smiper the second he feels the pressure on him.
# posted by : November 18, 2005 9:07 am
: November 18, 2005 9:07 am Post a Comment
<< Home
