What's new
By:
USCHO Fan Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.

Ohio State 2024-25 Domination of the Portal Queen!

FiveHoleFrenzy said:
Correct...And to take it one step further. Go out and score the winner in OT.
Click to expand...
Muzerall could also have challenged the goal; she didn't because losing the challenge would have meant playing the first two minutes of OT down a player.

But if the move and goal was so obviously "dirty", then she would "obviously" have won the challenge, and the game, and the championship.

So, draw your own conclusions...
 
I'll ask this question? If the officials come out and say we messed up. 1. The penalty shot sould have not been allowed. 2. The penalty was illegal and should have been ruled no goal. Will you all post that you were wrong? Dirty dirty dirty.
 
Sierra said:
I'll ask this question? If the officials come out and say we messed up. 1. The penalty shot sould have not been allowed. 2. The penalty was illegal and should have been ruled no goal. Will you all post that you were wrong? Dirty dirty dirty.
Click to expand...
I'm truly curious.

Have you ever seen a penalty shot or 'shootout' goal disallowed for any sort of similar move, even remotely similar? College or international or NHL? If so, please give as much detail as you can - teams, dates, shooter, etc - so I can find video.
 
Gurth 2.0 said:
Learn to count to 5 and don't cover the puck in the crease and there isn't even a penalty shot to whine about.
Click to expand...
Agree with the count to 5 statement...totally inexcusable especially in two back to back frozen four games, but there was nothing in the video that was conclusive around covering the puck...and given the continued momentum of the puck it should not have resulted in the penalty/penalty shot.
 
creaseprotector100 said:
Agree with the count to 5 statement...totally inexcusable especially in two back to back frozen four games, but there was nothing in the video that was conclusive around covering the puck...and given the continued momentum of the puck it should not have resulted in the penalty/penalty shot.
Click to expand...
The rule states that not only can a player not 'cover' the puck, they are also not allowed to "gather the puck to their body". Because doing so deprives the other team the opportunity for a tap-in goal.

OSU player Maddi Wheeler *clearly* "gathered the puck" under her body, and so deprived UW player Lacey Eden the chance for the tap-in. If you look at the video, Eden is right there in position for a tap-in.

By the plain text of the rule, the penalty shot was clearly warranted.

-----------------------------------------------------

Part of the text of NCAA rule 67.1:
A defending player, except the goalkeeper, shall not be permitted to fall on the puck, hold the puck or gather the puck into the body or hands when the puck is within the goal crease.
PENALTY—Penalty shot/optional minor
 
Last edited:
It's a simple question. If the officials from that game come out and say WE made the wrong call. Will you post on the OSU thread that you were wrong ?
 
Hockeybuckeye said:
The NHL penalty shot rule is similar to the NCAA's that the puck must be kept in forward motion by the shooter.
Click to expand...
Yeah, that's his point. MacKinnon's move last night was similar to Simms' goal. And MacKinnon's was not disallowed; it was a good goal.

I'm truly curious.

Have you ever seen a penalty shot or 'shootout' goal disallowed for any sort of similar move, even remotely similar? College or international or NHL? If so, please give as much detail as you can - teams, dates, shooter, etc - so I can find video.
 
Hockeybuckeye said:
The NHL penalty shot rule is similar to the NCAA's that the puck must be kept in forward motion by the shooter.
Click to expand...
It took me maybe 15 minutes to find six real-world examples of shootout attempts that disprove your interpretation of this rule.

And LITERALLY AS I WAS TYPING UP MY POST, I witnessed a 7th example, live, in real time (by MacKinnon).

Your notion that a shooter is not allowed to stickhandle the puck backward on a penalty shot/shootout attempt is just plain wrong. There's no other way to put it.
 
3 Posters reply with no answer. Let me ask another question. If NHL players come out and say that the officials screwed OSU would you then agree?
 
Sierra said:
3 Posters reply with no answer. Let me ask another question. If NHL players come out and say that the officials screwed OSU would you then agree?
Click to expand...
I provided 7 examples from the NHL where this same move Simms made was allowed.

So I would say to your imaginary NHL players that they don't know what they're talking about.
 
davearm said:
I provided 7 examples from the NHL where this same move Simms made was allowed.

So I would say to your imaginary NHL players that they don't know what they're talking about.
Click to expand...
I googled last night, and came across this video. There are a number in here that are "worse" than Simms or Patrick Kane.

And (other than a couple "rebounds" disallowed, immaterial for this thread) they were all counted as good goals.

- YouTube

Enjoy the videos and music you love, upload original content, and share it all with friends, family, and the world on YouTube.
www.youtube.com www.youtube.com

But I'll give Sierra this: the video does show there are some NHL players who would say some of these goals shouldn't count.... the goalies. :-)
 
Last edited:
robertearle said:
There are a number in here that are "worse" than Simms or Patrick Kane.
Click to expand...
Not arguing about the UW vs tOSU shootout here, but just discussing the highlight package that you posted. Hopefully, I don't get called stupid or a loser for this (though I'm likely both for many other reasons.)

Do you think the puck continues in motion for the first goal in the highlights (Panthers). To me, it looks like it is getting away from him, so he has to stop it so he can skate over to it, corral it, and shoot. One of the less skillful NHL attempts I've seen wind up in the net. The puck is behind the goalpost in the replay, so it's kind of hard to see the puck in slow motion, but the puck didn't seem to be moving at all in the first view, and if moving, just laterally.

The Briere goal at 3:08 looks like a stop only because he carries so much momentum into it (skater & puck). There's a lot of deceleration of both, but he pushes forward again before the puck is coming to a dead stop, IMO.

The Marner goal, when I look at 4:17, it looks like the puck is motionless; however, it doesn't appear motionless in either of the other two views. That suggests that my eyes can trick me.

Other than that, Alex Stalock is quite consistent: he never stops the puck and he's never happy about the play that beats him. The Dallas attempt versus Detroit was also quite consistent: bad move, bad save attempt, bad camera quality, bad mic, and who knows what they decided.

Thanks for the entertainment.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top