Leaderboard

You don't need holders on a boot to check it for length. Stick your foot in the boot, toes feathering the toe cap and if you can slide a HB pencil down the back of your heel to the bottom of the boot then those puppies are too long for you.

A side note. I never get it why so many players (pros & joes alike) use mouth-guards as chewing toys, instead of you know....mouth-guards?

If there's a scramble at the net and the goalie can't get to the puck because there's a player in the crease, but that player doesn't initiate contact (say, the goalie tries to slide over and makes contact with the player), then it's no goal and the faceoff comes outside, but there's no penalty. If the player initiates the contact with the goalie (or could have reasonably avoided the contact and chooses not to), then there's a penalty. In general if there's accidental, incidental contact that's very light, I'm not calling a penalty. I'll yell at the player to watch the goalie and if a goal is scored at the point or right after the point of that contact, it's going to be washed out. If there's any intentional contact or more than very mild contact initiated by the player, then they're getting a minor, major or match penalty depending on the exact scenario. I officiate under the Hockey Canada rules and there are some differences vs. what I'm reading in the USA Hockey rules. So, you may be better off getting advice from a USA Hockey official, but I suspect that you're not seeing penalties called when the officials feel that the contact is light/incidental or when the attacking player doesn't initiate the contact. For my frame of reference, here's the Hockey Canada Goalie Interference section: Rule 8.5 Interference with the Goaltender Goaltender interference refers to any attacking player who, by means of their stick or body, interferes with or impedes the movements of the goaltender by actual physical contact. While incidental contact with the goaltender may occur, attacking players must make an effort to avoid contact in all circumstances. The onus is always on the attacking player and players who do not make an effort to avoid the goaltender must be penalized. Protection of the Goaltender: A Goaltender is not ‘fair game’ just because they are outside their goal crease. A penalty under this rule will be called where an opposing player makes unnecessary contact with the goaltender anywhere on the ice. Likewise, Referees should be alert to penalize goaltenders for infractions they commit within the vicinity of their goal. Goal Crease Area: Unless the puck is in the goal crease area, a player of the attacking team may not stand in the goal crease. If the puck should enter the net while such conditions prevail, the goal will NOT BE ALLOWED. However, if an attacking player is in the goal crease but does not interfere with the Goaltender and another attacking player (who is outside the goal crease) scores, the goal WILL BE ALLOWED provided that the player who was in the goal crease does not attempt to play the puck, interfere with the play or obstruct the Goaltender’s view or movements. Therefore, it would be reasonable for a Referee to judge that a situation may warrant disallowing a goal under this rule without assessing an attacking player a penalty. The penalty should be announced as “Interference with the Goaltender”. 8.5 (a) A Minor penalty will be assessed to any player who commits interference with goaltender. 8.5 (b) A Major penalty and Game Misconduct penalty, at the discretion of the referee, based on the degree of violence of impact, may be assessed to any player who commits interference with the goaltender. A Major penalty and Game Misconduct penalty will be assessed to any player who charges the goaltender. Note 1: See Rule 7.4 (b)(Interpretation 2) – Charging, for the definition of “charging”. A Major penalty and Game Misconduct penalty will be assessed to any player who injures an opponent by an Interference with the Goaltender infraction that would otherwise call for a Minor penalty. 8.5 (c) A Match penalty will be assessed to any player who attempts to injure or deliberately injures a goaltender by Interference. 8.5 (d) No Misconduct penalty may be assessed for interference with the goaltender. 8.5 (e) A Game Misconduct penalty must be assessed any time a Major penalty is assessed for interference with the goaltender, as detailed under Rule 8.5 (b). INTERPRETATIONS Interpretation 1 Rule 8.5 (a) Any goal scored on a play where an attacking player initiates contact with the goaltender will be disallowed, regardless of whether the contact occurs inside or outside of the goal crease. The only exception to this is where the attacking player is fouled by a defending player and, as a result, is unable to avoid contact with the goaltender. Interpretation 2 Rule 8.5 (a) Where an attacking player is tripped, hooked, cross-checked, or otherwise interfered with, falls, and makes contact with the goaltender, there must be an effort by the attacking player to avoid making contact with the goaltender. If the player does not make an effort to avoid contact with the goaltender, then they must be penalized for interference with the goaltender. The referee should also penalize the defending player who committed the initial foul under the appropriate rule. Interpretation 3 Rule 8.5 (a) An attacking player is NOT committing a foul by simply standing in the goal crease. However, if while standing in the crease, the attacking player attempts to play the puck, interfere with the play, or impede the goaltender’s vision or movements, then no goal may be scored. If the puck enters the net in this situation, the goal must be disallowed. Note 1: No penalty would be assessed unless the attacking player’s body or stick makes actual physical contact with the goaltender. Interpretation 4 Rule 8.5 (a) An attacking player is standing in the goal crease. The puck is shot, hitting the player in the crease, and drops down in the crease. The attacking player gets out of the crease, then shoots the puck into the goal. GOAL. The puck did not enter the goal while the attacking player was actually in the crease.

I hate waxed laces too. But Elite makes thicker unwaxed laces that give a tighter hold like waxed do (I think they’re called Pro-X7). They’re the only laces I’ll use now.

I believe the USA Hockey reference is under Rule 625 Interference and the key difference between a faceoff outside and a penalty is physical contact: (a) A minor penalty shall be assessed for interference. This includes the following actions which shall be penalized under this rule: (8) Any player who makes physical contact, using their stick or body, in a manner that interferes with the movement of the goalkeeper, unless otherwise specified in the rules. (b) A face-off shall be conducted at the nearest neutral zone face-off spot any time an attacking player stands, holds their stick, or skates through the goal crease provided the puck is in the attacking zone, the attacking team has possession of the puck and the goalkeeper is in contact with the crease. No goal may be scored with an attacking player in the goal crease unless the puck has preceded the player(s) into the goal crease or the goalkeeper is out of the goal crease area. However, if the attacking player has been physically interfered with by the actions of a defending player that causes them to be in the goal crease, play shall not be stopped and any legal goal scored shall be allowed. (Note) The goal crease area shall include all the space outlined by the semi-circular crease lines (including crease lines) and extending vertically to the level of the top of the goal frame. The interference section is in reference to minor penalties/taking the faceoff outside. For plays that may be majors or match penalties, see Rule 607 Charging: (c) A minor plus a misconduct or a major plus a game misconduct penalty shall be assessed to a player who body checks or charges a goalkeeper while the goalkeeper is within his goal crease or privileged area. (d) A goalkeeper is NOT “fair game” because he is outside his privileged area. A penalty for interference or charging should be called in every case where an opposing player makes unnecessary contact with a goalkeeper. Likewise, Referees should be alert to penalize goalkeepers for any infractions they commit in the vicinity of the goal. (Note 1) For the purpose of this rule, any accidental or unavoidable contact that occurs with the goalkeeper shall be penalized under the Interference rule. Any deliberate body contact or check that is delivered to the goalkeeper shall be penalized as Charging. (Note 2) The goalkeeper’s “Privileged Area” is an area outlined by connecting the end zone face-off spots with an imaginary line and imaginary lines from each face-off spot running perpendicular to the end boards. (e) A match penalty for reckless endangerment may also be assessed for charging.

Looks like he's also in the ST girdle, those look like shells to me.

Looks like McDavid's back in his trusty old OG JetSpeed build, dressed up to appear ASVish: Boot pattern looks like before, can also see foxing and hints of a separate outsole. He's (probably) never leaving that build for good.

Been using one for a little over a week and you're right, it's a little longer and beefed up. I was surprised at how much I liked the stick. With this trend to lighter and lighter sticks I've often felt disconnected from the stick when on the ice (the Catalyst PX being the worst offender) but I didn't experience that. First stick since the One95 where I'm actually impressed with a Bauer twig.

Quick look at the new Bauer AG5NT stick. Low kick. Green chrome. Boron material added. https://youtu.be/JhGAW04D6Pw