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:
Nathan Eric Hampton <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Nathan Eric Hampton <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Tue, 16 Dec 1997 14:31:15 +0000
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (44 lines)
Chris graciously says "You are certainly entitled to your opinion, but
the rule book does not support your conclusion." As with most rules what
is in black and white is terribly insufficient because any rule requires
interpretation. Interpretation is different than opinion.
 
Clearly, there is more to the rule then Dr. Keeney's post of:
Rule 4-9-b  Note 1:  "Completion of the play by the team in possession"
in this rule means that the puck must have come into the possession and
control of an opposing player or goalkeeper or has been "frozen".  This
does not
mean a rebound off the goalkeeper, the goal or the boards or any
accidental contact with the body of equipment of an opposing player.
 
(1) "completion of the play" does not read "control" to me. These are
different sets of rules, and more important, interpretation. I admit I
do not have a rule book to reference at this time to see if a more
meaningful rule applies.
 
(2) the above rule says "goalkeeper or has been 'frozen'" NOT
"goalkeeper and
has been frozen" - so control by a goalkeeper does not require the puck
be frozen. Further reading of the rule points out that "accidental"
contact is not control, but few goalie slaves are accidental.
 
(3) deflection of the puck off a goal keeper's blocker, leg pads, or
stick would constitute as much contol as a forward shooting the puck
with the blade of his stick. (This could include a puck dropping off the
goaltender into the crease where he could smother it.)
 
The concept that control is something created only when the puck is on
the stick so that strides can be taken is a concept that lacks
appreciation and understanding of goal tending skills. It appears many
voicing opinion of this rule lack this appreciation.
 
I am no fan of eastern hockey so I lack the emotion you guys are showing
towards the interpretation of this rule. Some gain by a strict,
conservative interpretation of the rule and the others gain by a
liberal, weak interpretation. Good luck in your battle for control.
 
Nathan
 
HOCKEY-L is for discussion of college ice hockey;  send information to
[log in to unmask], The College Hockey Information List.

ATOM RSS1 RSS2