directory Light the Lamp - a Columbus Blue Jackets blog: You be the judge

Countdown to Rick Nash's contract expiration:

Thursday, January 8, 2009

You be the judge

This was sent in by DJ Davy B and once again Toronto makes us cringe as they actually ruled this a goal:

I know we've beaten this horse pretty good but this inconsistancy is beyond rediculouls. I've seen soccer goals scored with less kicking motion.

Of course we all don't have to be reminded (but I will anyways)...somehow this goal by Manny Malhotra was ruled a distinct kicking motion by those same clowns in Toronto:

I know I know...I'm yelling into a black hole with this stuff.



Jacob said...

I was watching the game and thought the Edmonton goal was good. The puck bounced off of Strudwick's skate well before he moved his foot, and even so, he was moving his foot parallel with the net. He wasn't ever kicking towards the net.

So, in this instance, good call by Toronto in my opinion.

Now, they totally blew it on the Malhotra goal.

Rick said...

Playoffs = Respect.

The League has proved thid year that they really don't have a clue. How do I get that job?

DJ Davy B said...

Happy to point out that the "war room" is anything but fair. A kick is a kick whether the foot goes forward or sideways. Its a distinct kicking motion at regular speed and especially at slow speed. I still can't figure how Manny was able to kick with his head in front of his leg and the other leg in the air. As I wrote to the NHL its called kinesiology and its physically impossible. The NHL rewards long time franchises and penalizes as its chooses. We continue to pay for Dougie's daily rants to the NHL office.

Rick said...

This comment was too funny & had to pass it along (from Puck Rakers):


t.r. any truth to the rumor that the syracuse crunch has folded due to lack of players??...what's the chance of the blujackets adopting a crunch jersey as the new third jersey?.....and the hits just keep on coming"

It gave me a chuckle to start the day.

JAL said...

The whole "kicking" thing is stupid anyway. The intent of the rule is to prevent pucks from being intentionally directed into the goal by a skate.

Change the rule to declare "no goal" where the skate was moved specifically to make contact with the puck.

I know, the purists will ask how you can judge intent, but since we have replay, you look to see if the feet were moved to hit the puck, and where the player's eyes were at the time. It should be pretty simple, actually.

A Shot From The Point