2011 Stanley Cup Finals
- Started
- Last post
- 126 Responses
- OP310
Thomas is awesome. Luongo not so much haha
- PonyBoy0
Rad.
- chris_himself0
Can't wait for the next game! Bruins to win.
- Melanie0
Can't wait for the next game! Canucks to win.
- pastpastdue0
"It's not like you don't see players chopping at goalies when they are covering the puck." I guess I could restate this better. You can get a slashing penalty as a goalie when you are in the crease, just as a player can get a penalty for slashing the goalie in the crease, inside or out. Every other rule applies the same, the only difference is that goaltender interference changes the stipulation, because most time, if you hit a goalie, he's trying to make a save. You could also hold a goalie and drag him out of the crease - you wouldn't get a holding penalty, you'd get a goaltender interference penalty.
- pastpastdue0
I loved Tim Thomas's hit. Thought it was great and timely. A goalie is allowed to hit, just as any other player is allowed to. You can also hit the goalie should he leave the crease. Technically, you can hit a goalie in the crease should there be some crazy circumstance where he is handling the puck, but you can't hit him if he is trying to make a save, get position, etc. thus, goalie interference.
The crease exists to provide sanctity for a goalie to make saves. It's not like you don't see players chopping at goalies when they are covering the puck. The only thing outlined in any rulebook is using it as an area to define what constitutes as preventing goaltenders from making saves around the net. What I would say is, try to find anything in the NHL rule book that defines what Thomas did as illegal.
It's not interference because Sedin had possession of the puck. He is attempting to handle it. To say he didn't really have possession of the puck is off. He was trying to drop it down to his stick to handle it. You don't have to have the puck to get hit, regardless. How many times in a game do players sacrifice their body to make the right pass? Tons, and usually, when they get hit, it is right after they get rid of the puck.
- C'mon, cut me a break. I'm a hockey nerd and also used to be a referee.pastpastdue
- you can't hit a goalie in the crease OR out.eegrek
- eieio0
On another note couldn't that Thomas hit be considered interference or something? I'm glad they didn't call anything because it was entertaining but still, I figure in another game it would be called.
- learn the rules....aldebaran
- if you have the puck you can be hit. if you don't then you can't be hit. It's easy.aldebaran
- sedin didn't really have the puck he was trying to bring down on the iceeieio
- he was also inside his creaseeieio
- I think inside the crease means totally off limits for hitting or being hit as a goalieeieio
- in the video sedin was a split second too slow from getting the shot off. He had possession of the puckOP31
- still inside the creaseeieio
- he wasn't going to shoot either he was grabbing it out the aireieio
- if he is in the crease more of a reason to hit himOP31
- but its a penalty.eieio
- its not a penaltyOP31
- OP310
oldie but goodie. This is a headshot. Best part of the vid is at 1:16 when they drop the stretcher haha
- Fanco0
sigh...
just look at this video. look at all of those with any kind of momentum. what do you see?
- @ 0:21Fanco
- @ 0:28Fanco
- @ 0:43
etc. etc. etc.Fanco - uh not even close to the same thing...aldebaran
- i see feet getting off the ground. isnt that what you've been arguing about...Fanco
- What were talking about is the jumping motion. Not the fact that they end up in the air.aldebaran
- Two different things with similar results.aldebaran
- Not even close. And if you can't tell the difference get the fuck off the ice before you kill somebody asshole.sigg
- Nice. Classy. You must be one of those players with an anger management issues.Fanco
- aldebaran0
"when you DO hit a player. any momentum you have will stop, naturally all energy spent towards him lifts you up a bit. look at any other hit in that game and you'll see that pattern all the time. you're argument about jumping up is all bull. so drop it. "
oh bullshit. watch the animation and tell me that he wasn't about to jump.
- pastpastdue0
Yeah, I don't think anyone should see this as anything but a late hit. I too have played hockey for almost 20 years now (most as a goalie, but who's counting!)
Horton didn't see him coming. He was hit late, but any sooner would have had the same repercussions, no? He got knocked the fudge out and would have been had it happened .5 seconds sooner because he wasn't looking.
- Fanco0
my turn to throw in a comment as a hockey player.
his hit was legal and illegal. it was NOT a head shot. it's illegal because it'S late, very very late. he should've stopped. but horton should've had his head up instead of watching his pass.
but this malarkey about that hit being a headshot and him jumping and aiming for his head is over the top. when a player jumps before a hit. it's painfully obvious and he would've received a much harsher penalty other than interference. as for the perceived elbow to the head. hell no. when you hit. you throw out your arms. conscious or not. horton's position was leaning forward and you can plainly see that rome crouches a bit before the hit. the best way to avoid exactly head contact to the elbow. it might of hit the shoulder pads, but that is not a headshot. this is another problem that many people have been calling for : take out the hard plastic from the shoulder pads and bring back the softer shoulder pads.
I'm a defenseman and i hit players in front of the net/along the boards all the time and in open ice situations just like that hit right there. when you DO hit a player. any momentum you have will stop, naturally all energy spent towards him lifts you up a bit. look at any other hit in that game and you'll see that pattern all the time. you're argument about jumping up is all bull. so drop it.
- Mister20
Now having said all this
Both teams are out one player.
Its all good in hockey.