Wednesday, April 26, 2006
Rules Bleg
One for the next season of "You Make The Call" happened in the 1st period of last night's Flames game. I think we're all clear on the gist of Rule 51 this year:
Late in the first, Huselius whacked the puck over the glass, no deflection, and was assessed a penalty. Just right, I'd say, but then we saw Iginla and Sutter arguing about it. What they were saying was that the puck was in the air when Huselius hit it (which it was, roughly 2 feet above the ice).
The opening sentence of Rule 51 uses shooting and batting the puck interchangeably, so I assume that also applies to the 2005-06 Addition: accident or not, bat the puck out of play and you've got yourself a minor penalty.
Except, like I say, the Flames were arguing. And I'm pretty sure I know why this is; it's because in a game late this season (I forget who the opponent was, but John Garrett was the colour guy) someone on the other team batted a puck at roughly head-height straight out of play, and there was no call. And it's not because the refs missed it; there was a discussion, and the result was, no penalty.
Can anyone tell me what the correct ruling is here? Is it possible that swiping your stick at eye-level (i.e. above the shoulders/crossbar) and batting a puck out of play is not a penalty, but doing the same at knee-level is? Your help is urgently requested, friend.
When any player, while in his defending zone, shoots 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.
Late in the first, Huselius whacked the puck over the glass, no deflection, and was assessed a penalty. Just right, I'd say, but then we saw Iginla and Sutter arguing about it. What they were saying was that the puck was in the air when Huselius hit it (which it was, roughly 2 feet above the ice).
The opening sentence of Rule 51 uses shooting and batting the puck interchangeably, so I assume that also applies to the 2005-06 Addition: accident or not, bat the puck out of play and you've got yourself a minor penalty.
Except, like I say, the Flames were arguing. And I'm pretty sure I know why this is; it's because in a game late this season (I forget who the opponent was, but John Garrett was the colour guy) someone on the other team batted a puck at roughly head-height straight out of play, and there was no call. And it's not because the refs missed it; there was a discussion, and the result was, no penalty.
Can anyone tell me what the correct ruling is here? Is it possible that swiping your stick at eye-level (i.e. above the shoulders/crossbar) and batting a puck out of play is not a penalty, but doing the same at knee-level is? Your help is urgently requested, friend.
# posted by Matt @ 1:50 pm 
Comments:
I've wondered about this. Every game, a defender deflects a shot over the glass. Why aren't those called?
What if a defender deliberately deflects a shot over the glass? What if he deliberately deflects a teammate's hard pass over the glass?
Post a Comment
<< Home
I've wondered about this. Every game, a defender deflects a shot over the glass. Why aren't those called?
What if a defender deliberately deflects a shot over the glass? What if he deliberately deflects a teammate's hard pass over the glass?
Post a Comment
<< Home
