HOCKEY-L Archives

- Hockey-L - The College Hockey Discussion List

Hockey-L@LISTS.MAINE.EDU

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Mike Machnik <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Mike Machnik <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Sat, 4 Mar 1995 03:00:21 -0500
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (52 lines)
>  Now I have a couple of questions for those out there who know the rules
>pretty well (Mike or Keith?): 1. In the BG game tonight, the water bottle
>that was hooked onto the top of the LSSU net was knocked off and left
>dangling by it's string in front of the net (about a foot down). I'm
>curious to know what would happen if BG would have deflected the puck off
>of the bottle into the goal, or what would happen if the puck deflected
>off of the bottle on it's way into the goal?
 
I'm going to have to defer to a referee or somebody else on this one.
My guess is that if the puck was shot legally, then the goal would be
allowed on the basis that the water bottle was either part of the
"goalkeeper's equipment" or else the "common sense" fact that the
bottle being in the way was not the offense's fault.  Common sense
would seem to indicate the goal would count, but I cannot be certain
nor can I find a rule which seems to cover this.  An experienced
official may be able to tell us which rule, if any, would apply.
 
>2.  BG defenseman Kelly
>Perrault took a slapshot from on his side of the red line which Grahame
>saved and held onto.  Referee Shell whistled the play and brought the
>face off back down the ice in the BG end.  Why is this?  Was it an
>offside shot?
 
Hard to know without having seen the play.  My first thought is that
one of two things happened:
 
1) Perrault was ruled to have committed intentional offsides (was
another BG player in the zone?).  But I have usually only seen this
called when it is dumped in and another offensive player in the zone
touches the puck first, which doesn't seem to have happened here.
2) Grahame stopped the puck just outside the crease and behind the goal
line, which would still make it icing.
 
OK, hold on...if Perrault shot the puck right on Grahame who stopped
it and then the play was blown dead, rule 6-18-d(3) may have applied:
 
"When the puck is struck above 4 feet directly to the goalkeeper,
there shall be an immediate whistle.
(deleted)
b) If the attacking team is of greater numerical strength, the faceoff
shall be conducted at the attacking team's defensive end-zone spot."
 
As you can see, there are a number of possibilities, which makes it
difficult to know what actually applied without having seen it.
 
If Perrault did not touch the puck with a high stick and it went on
goal, and Grahame stopped it, then I am not sure what the ruling could
have been.
---                                                                   ---
Mike Machnik                                            [log in to unmask]
Cabletron Systems, Inc.                                    *HMM* 11/13/93

ATOM RSS1 RSS2