Did the player throw the puck or not?
_____
From: james acheson [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
Sent: Monday, April 12, 2004 12:15 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: throwing the puck
the point of my last post was that you cannot simply read the rule book.
those rules are inconsistent with one another, it is as simple as that.
read the rule book on elbowing. and tell me that it is called just as the
book is written...
it is not... it is about 80% interpretation and 20% writing.
read the book on interference... that is about 99% interpretation.
read the book on offsides and interference... if a player is offsides
becasue he was intentionally pushed offsides (i.e. a player is skating along
the blue line waiting for the puck carrier to bring the puck into the
zone... he is pushed in and his team is called offsides)... what is the
proper call??)
faceoff outside the zone?
or faceoff PLUS minor for interference?
that happened to Maine not long before the delay call... that one would have
more reasonably been called a minor and not just a face off in my opinion,
"Chesley, Clair" <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
Read the rule book. It says "throw". Did the player "throw" the puck.
Yes. Therefore a minor.
Now if you want to persist in talking about what the ref "should" have
done..........
Did the player "hold" the puck? Well, he caught it. I don't think that you
can catch a puck without holding it. At least I never have. The player is
allowed to catch the puck and to drop it with no whistle. So you don't
whistle the instant the player catches (holds) the puck. So by the time he
caught it and then immediately threw it the whistle blew. At that point the
puck had been thrown. Therefore a minor.
I guess that's why the rule is in the book in the first place. Otherwise
there would be no need to have the throwing rule at all.
_____
From: james acheson [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
Sent: Monday, April 12, 2004 11:39 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: throwing the puck
see the problem here is that you have a level 4 ref who haas done many
national tournaments and a level 3 ref who has done many Mass. state play
downs... (and who incedentally was the guy assigned to train Scott
Whittermore, (one of the 2 assistant referees in the Maine DU game) all
those years ago when Scott started officiating.
we referees say that it was poor judgment to call that a minor.
people reading the rule book have a different interpretation of the rule.
read the elbowing rule... it says '"contact" not "attemppted murder"
read the contact to the head rule... it says "ANY CONTACT to the head, not
violent conact.... and you know darn well that those rules are open to
interpretation.
the man in the crease for a diallowed goal leaves NO ROOM FOR
INTERPRETATION.
Lawson''s goal with 6 seconds left in OT at the Whitt was open to
interpretation.. a puck deflected off his skate and it counted... had he
directed it in (IN THE JUDGMENT OF THE REF,... the no goal. that is a
judgment call)
once a player holds the puck, it is a whistle.
I would only call a minor if a player picks it up off the ice and throws it.
(or if in the crease, a minor/optional penatly shot)
"Chesley, Clair" <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
Well you have to go by the rule book in my opinion. Just like the skate in
the crease call.
"If the puck is thrown, a minor penalty shall be assessed." : is very
clear. There is not room for interpretation that I can see. The puck was
thrown, therefore a minor. The ref should not have blown the whistle as
soon as he caught it because he is allowed the time to drop it. (If the puck
is caught and dropped immediately, play shall continue.) It doesn't take
much more time to throw it than to drop it. The ref would have to have had
the whistle already in his mouth. I don't think I've ever seen a ref put
the whistle in his mouth when a player caught a puck. 999 times out of a
1000 the player drops the puck and plays it with his stick. By the time he
had held in long enough for a whistle he had thrown it. Therefore a
correct call. Just like the skate in the crease. And generally consistent
with the way the whole tournament was officiated. By the book. I though
that overall the officiating was quite good throughout the tournament.
_____
From: Matt Bigley [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
Sent: Monday, April 12, 2004 10:59 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: throwing the puck
I agree. He held it long enough for the whistle and the face off, which
should have been the call.
----- Original Message -----
From: james <mailto:[log in to unmask]> acheson
To: [log in to unmask] <mailto:[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Monday, April 12, 2004 10:55 AM
Subject: Re: throwing the puck
RIGHT>.. but how can you throw it when there was supposed to be a whistle
for holding it?
[log in to unmask] <mailto:[log in to unmask]> wrote:
The NCAA ice hockey rule book ("Handling the puck," Section 19. a.) says:
"If the puck is caught and dropped immediately, play shall continue. If the
puck is carried or held, play shall be stopped. If the puck is thrown, a
minor penalty shall be assessed."
By the way, there is violation called "clipping," which is a check "at or
below the opponent's knees." Clipping is supposed to be called if it is
attempted, whether or not contact is made.
dave wollstadt
_____
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Tax Center - File online by April 15th
<http://taxes.yahoo.com/filing.html>
_____
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Tax Center - File online by April 15th
<http://taxes.yahoo.com/filing.html>
_____
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Tax Center - File online by April 15th
<http://taxes.yahoo.com/filing.html>