Briere Shootout Goal

[brelic]

Analysis on the Briere shootout goal by Mike Murphy, Senior VP of hockey operations.

http://video.nhl.com/videocenter/console?catid=2&id=132800

Basically, the player can stop as long as the puck continues to be in motion/forward motion (i.e. stickhandling is obviously allowed). What they're trying to prevent is the spinorama type moves, apparently.

[sarsippius]

Interesting....for the last 35 years my understanding of penalty shot rules was that the player had to keep moving toward the net, the rule they're citing says it's the puck that must keep moving. So in that case I agree with the ruling of good goal, at the time I really thought it should have been disallowed. Learn something new every day...

[hf101]

A great explanation, maybe that is why Briere was smiling....ha. He knew he kept the puck moving. My guess is we will see more of these moves. I really like the way the nhl is interacting with it's fans in these videos.

[aziz]

'twas crap. bad goal. bad explanation. the guy in the video even says, "...but in stopping, [briere] continued to dribble or stickhandle the puck side to side, backward foreward."

the rulebook does NOT just say the puck has to stay in motion as the guy claims. it says the puck has to continue motion towards the goal line. side to side and backward foreward doesn't cut it. the guy cites rule 24.2 of the rulebook. here is the pertinent part:

The puck must be kept in motion towards the opponent’s goal line and

once it is shot, the play shall be considered complete. No goal can be

scored on a rebound of any kind (an exception being the puck off the

goal post or crossbar, then the goalkeeper and then directly into the

goal), and any time the puck crosses the goal line or comes to a

complete stop, the shot shall be considered complete.

the play was dead the second briere pulled the puck back. terrible call on the ice, terrible call from toronto, terrible rationalization after the fact.

if this kind of crap is allowed going forward, the shootout is going to become even more of a joke than it already is. a goalie has no chance on a play like that. a player on a breakaway with no back pressure, no time constraints, and who can pull the puck back and around will score 80% of the time. the other 20% being goalies who come flying out of the net and slide tackle the shooter.

imo, the league needs to make an announcement reiterating (because it's already in the freaking rulebook) that the puck must continue its progress towards the goal, and then institute a 5 second shot clock on the penalty shot, from the moment the player touches the puck at center ice.

[idahophilly]

'twas crap. bad goal. bad explanation. the guy in the video even says, "...but in stopping, [briere] continued to dribble or stickhandle the puck side to side, backward foreward."

the rulebook does NOT just say the puck has to stay in motion as the guy claims. it says the puck has to continue motion towards the goal line. side to side and backward foreward doesn't cut it. the guy cites rule 24.2 of the rulebook. here is the pertinent part:

The puck must be kept in motion towards the opponent’s goal line and

once it is shot, the play shall be considered complete. No goal can be

scored on a rebound of any kind (an exception being the puck off the

goal post or crossbar, then the goalkeeper and then directly into the

goal), and any time the puck crosses the goal line or comes to a

complete stop, the shot shall be considered complete.

the play was dead the second briere pulled the puck back. terrible call on the ice, terrible call from toronto, terrible rationalization after the fact.

if this kind of crap is allowed going forward, the shootout is going to become even more of a joke than it already is. a goalie has no chance on a play like that. a player on a breakaway with no back pressure, no time constraints, and who can pull the puck back and around will score 80% of the time. the other 20% being goalies who come flying out of the net and slide tackle the shooter.

imo, the league needs to make an announcement reiterating (because it's already in the freaking rulebook) that the puck must continue its progress towards the goal, and then institute a 5 second shot clock on the penalty shot, from the moment the player touches the puck at center ice.

Ok, but players have been doing that spinorama move and they all counted when they went in. That's reversing the puck movement all the way. However, I'd like the shoot out gone, forever. That's not going to happen so I suspect there will be a rule revision for next year as to the player and puck movement. Leave the spinorama moves to all star talent show and let hockey be hockey...

[aziz]

Ok, but players have been doing that spinorama move and they all counted when they went in. That's reversing the puck movement all the way.

most of them. some of those guys do manage to keep the puck moving at the net. but the ones that don't, those shouldn't count.

[canoli]

Ya I don't get what Murphy is talking about here. They flashed up the rule while he's talking and they're obviously saying 2 different things. Murphy says it's a good goal "as long as it's being stick-handled or dribbled or moved from side-to-side..." but the rule clearly states "...towards the opponent's goal line..."

Under Murphy's reasoning what's to prevent a guy skating in, stopping a few few out and then tapping the puck side-to-side until the goalie commits himself? It wouldn't be hard to make a goalie bite. Once he does the shooter has a clear hole. I wouldn't be surprised to see shooter % rise into the 90s.

[sarsippius]

Damn canoli, you're a hot chick

[canoli]

hehe...a self-portrait at the beach...

actually she just got married to a former NHLer, now playing in the KHL ... right before that retired after ~10 years on the pro _____ circuit...

[Spinorama]

Analysis on the Briere shootout goal by Mike Murphy, Senior VP of hockey operations.

http://video.nhl.com...tid=2&id=132800

Basically, the player can stop as long as the puck continues to be in motion/forward motion (i.e. stickhandling is obviously allowed). What they're trying to prevent is the spinorama type moves, apparently.

what's wrong with the spinorama?

[canoli]

I guess because the puck almost has to stop going toward the goal line...? But I don't know anymore. After hearing what Murphy had to say I'm confoozed.

[aziz]

what's wrong with the spinorama?

because no one likes the spinorama :blink:

[ratskull]

the play was dead the second briere pulled the puck back. terrible call on the ice, terrible call from toronto, terrible rationalization after the fact.

if this kind of crap is allowed going forward, the shootout is going to become even more of a joke than it already is.

My sentiments exactly. What's the point of having rules if they are bent whenever the league sees fit. The shootout sucks, but it sucks even more when they don't enforce the damn rules.

[Dynamo 47]

Interesting....for the last 35 years my understanding of penalty shot rules was that the player had to keep moving toward the net, the rule they're citing says it's the puck that must keep moving. So in that case I agree with the ruling of good goal, at the time I really thought it should have been disallowed. Learn something new every day...

I was under the same impression. While I was kind of ticked they even reviewed it; I thought there would be a realistic shot of overturning the goal. And why the hell wasn't Jagr one of the shooters? If not first? He scores it automatically puts the pressure on the Debs

[TedZep]

Let's not add more rules to the stupid shootout, let's just eliminate it altogether.

If ties were good enough for Maurice Richard, they are good enough for me.

[idahophilly]

Let's not add more rules to the stupid shootout, let's just eliminate it altogether.

If ties were good enough for Maurice Richard, they are good enough for me.

Oh I agree, lets get rid of it. But in our over regulated world that won't happen.

[Spinorama]

because no one likes the spinorama :blink:

[Vanflyer]

Interesting....for the last 35 years my understanding of penalty shot rules was that the player had to keep moving toward the net, the rule they're citing says it's the puck that must keep moving.

I always thought the puck had to keep forward progress, so it never crossed my mind that a player could / would stop. If you look at some of the penalty shots over the years, many guys would start to skate laterally to get a different angle going towards the goalie.