Anyone seen this video?

[epstud74 24]

Wow..is he pissed. I'd probably be like that if i played goalie too

[furlanitalia 1]

Holy. I can not believe they let that go! My buddy just got called up there, I'll have to ask him about that!

[mrusse01 0]

Do they have video replay in the A? From what I heard, that second 'goal' hit the post....I'm not sure about the ruling on the first one, he seems to lose control of the puck, but I think it's always moving foward, so I don't know if that counts or not.

[furlanitalia 1]

You know, you might be right on the first one. Still is tough to tell from the video though.

[shooter27 116]

There is no way that first one is a good goal, the puck was moving completely parallel to the net to the point the guy had to stop and go backwards to shoot. That play should have been blown dead, end of story.

[chippa13 1844]

The puck actually was still moving forward.

[Trudy14 0]

Yeah I'm gonna have to say no way on that first goal. The second one is tough to tell but judging by the angle and speed the puck came back out I'd say it went in. If that hit the post it would have shot out much faster and farther then it did. Tough to tell though. Great 'flip out' by Rask, I was hoping to see him in more games for the Bruins this season but his services weren't really needed.

[furlanitalia 1]

Haha I really don't think the first was a goal, second was tough, but I still think its inconclusive from video evidence. Plus notice how he only goes berserk after the second goal, not so much the first...nevermind, they just don't show his reaction...

[chippa13 1844]

Yeah I'm gonna have to say no way on that first goal. The second one is tough to tell but judging by the angle and speed the puck came back out I'd say it went in. If that hit the post it would have shot out much faster and farther then it did. Tough to tell though. Great 'flip out' by Rask, I was hoping to see him in more games for the Bruins this season but his services weren't really needed.

He'll be Thomas' full time backup next season. Hopefully, the B's do it right this time and let the kid learn a few things before giving him the keys to the car. Lord knows they screwed up both Raycroft and Toivonen.

[Warriorsdman 1]

Yeah I'm gonna have to say no way on that first goal. The second one is tough to tell but judging by the angle and speed the puck came back out I'd say it went in. If that hit the post it would have shot out much faster and farther then it did. Tough to tell though. Great 'flip out' by Rask, I was hoping to see him in more games for the Bruins this season but his services weren't really needed.

He'll be Thomas' full time backup next season. Hopefully, the B's do it right this time and let the kid learn a few things before giving him the keys to the car. Lord knows they screwed up both Raycroft and Toivonen.

And then he ended up in Colorado, where he is still horrible. God the days of Roy spoiled us.

[furlanitalia 1]

Yah, you definitely were spoiled with Roy. I guess its fitting though to have Rask backing up Thomas, remember his flip outs from last year? (haven't seen any recent ones...)

[epstud74 24]

Amazing..The Avs fans didnt even witness Roy's best years either.

[interpathway 9]

The puck actually was still moving forward.

That's not the defining ruling though. Look at PMB spin'o'rama in Minny or Blake's in Toronto. Their pucks go backward ata point in their move, but since their momentum carries them forward it is constituted as a good goal.

It is impossible to tell definitively from that camera angle, but I don't think the first shooter skated backward towards the puck...

[Rustpot 1]

The puck actually was still moving forward.

That's not the defining ruling though. Look at PMB spin'o'rama in Minny or Blake's in Toronto. Their pucks go backward ata point in their move, but since their momentum carries them forward it is constituted as a good goal.

It is impossible to tell definitively from that camera angle, but I don't think the first shooter skated backward towards the puck...

There is a line in the rule book allowing the "spin'o'rama" as the sole exception to the need for continuous forward movement.

The player losing control is also grounds for the play to be called dead IIRC.

[furlanitalia 1]

This was on sportsnet last night talking about how Gerber will miss three games but Rask won't be suspended. The team is being fined though.

[chippa13 1844]

The puck actually was still moving forward.

That's not the defining ruling though. Look at PMB spin'o'rama in Minny or Blake's in Toronto. Their pucks go backward ata point in their move, but since their momentum carries them forward it is constituted as a good goal.

It is impossible to tell definitively from that camera angle, but I don't think the first shooter skated backward towards the puck...

There is a line in the rule book allowing the "spin'o'rama" as the sole exception to the need for continuous forward movement.

The player losing control is also grounds for the play to be called dead IIRC.

I'd have to check again, but I believe the player can regain control of the puck so long as it continues to move toward the goal line and has not crossed it.

[interpathway 9]

There is a line in the rule book allowing the "spin'o'rama" as the sole exception to the need for continuous forward movement.

The player losing control is also grounds for the play to be called dead IIRC.

I'm sure this has been beaten to death before somewhere, but then why does this count according to the NHL?

Callahan shot it (no longer with control), before the puck ricochetted off the crossbar (backward movement for two feet or so, therefore it should've been whistled dead?).

Just wondering, obviously I hope we can all agree that the NHL shootout rules are open to too many variations to keep track of.

[furlanitalia 1]

Its true, shootouts have some many stipulations it seems of what can be done and what can't be done, but the same goes for almost all rules. Thankfully I've only ever called one penalty shot in my 7 years of reffing, and it was a goal, no question about it. Its neat to see though that in Callahan's goal the ref waives it off before signalling it a goal. That would definitely anger a few people.

[chippa13 1844]

There is a line in the rule book allowing the "spin'o'rama" as the sole exception to the need for continuous forward movement.

The player losing control is also grounds for the play to be called dead IIRC.

I'm sure this has been beaten to death before somewhere, but then why does this count according to the NHL?

Callahan shot it (no longer with control), before the puck ricochetted off the crossbar (backward movement for two feet or so, therefore it should've been whistled dead?).

Just wondering, obviously I hope we can all agree that the NHL shootout rules are open to too many variations to keep track of.

I'd say the Callahan shot is obviously a goal. You definitely are going against the spirit of the rules to disallow that one.

[lotus 2]

I was always under the impression that the play is alive as long as the player is moving towards the net. So if they come to a complete stop, or decide for some stupid reason they need to skate the other way, the play is dead. Therefore Callahans goal is good and the one in the OP is no good because he stopped.

[furlanitalia 1]

Yah, I'd have to say Callahans is good, but the first shot in the original video just looks like he had given up and was shooting for the fun of it. I bet he was pretty shocked that counted as a goal

[ndlancer95 0]

Oh my god, was he high during that. I see that the first shooter was out, but what happened on the second, did he not core. I love to see a hilarious psyche out, like in baseketball.

[fieldofdreams 0]

Its neat to see though that in Callahan's goal the ref waives it off before signalling it a goal. That would definitely anger a few people.

The ref did the right thing waving that off at first. It merely indicated that the intial shot did not cross the line.

[furlanitalia 1]

I never said it was wrong, I just said it would open a can of worms. Trust me, after 7 years of reffing you know that waving something off then calling it (even when its the right thing to do) can get you yelled at quite viciously.

[phunky_monkey 6]

There is a line in the rule book allowing the "spin'o'rama" as the sole exception to the need for continuous forward movement.

The player losing control is also grounds for the play to be called dead IIRC.

I'm sure this has been beaten to death before somewhere, but then why does this count according to the NHL?

Callahan shot it (no longer with control), before the puck ricochetted off the crossbar (backward movement for two feet or so, therefore it should've been whistled dead?).

Just wondering, obviously I hope we can all agree that the NHL shootout rules are open to too many variations to keep track of.

I'd say the Callahan shot is obviously a goal. You definitely are going against the spirit of the rules to disallow that one.

I agree with that