Shootout Question

[Biggun35]

During a shoot out can a shooter and puck come to a complete stop and start again?

Monday night the 2nd shooter skated just past the faceoff dots and can to a complete stop, faked a slap shot, and then skated to my right and shot. I got a piece of the puck with my shoulder but it still went in.

I thought that once the puck can to a complete stop, the try was over. I questioned the ref and he just shrugged his shoulders and said I should have made the save.

Am I mistaken?

[Chico01]

According to the NHL Rulebook:

Rule 30 Penalty Shot section a. The puck must be kept in motion towards the opponent's goal line and once it is shot, the play shall be considered complete.

I always thought the same as you, once he is in motion towards the net he can't go back and if he stopped he would have to shoot. If he stopped and faked and started forward again, I don't think the goal would be allowed. Unfortunately the ref isn't going to reverse this call at this time, but you might want to print the NHL Rulebook section on penalty shots and give him a copy.

[hroark2112]

I had a guy try something cute on me...probably the slowest spin-a-rama move you've ever seen! I think I even have a clip of it.

The ref let him finish the play, but told him it wouldn't have counted if it had gone in. The puck has to be in continuous forward motion during the penalty shot/shootout attempt. The only exception to the forward motion issue is if the puck hits the post, comes out and bounces into the goal off the goalie. Anything else, no goal.

Unless your ref doesn't know the rules, then it's a goal. There's some dumb refs out there, I had one allow a goal on a penalty shot on the rebound shot...luckily the other ref overturned it and told the guy what the rule really is.

[Redness]

Originally Posted by hroark2112

I had a guy try something cute on me...probably the slowest spin-a-rama move you've ever seen! I think I even have a clip of it.

The ref let him finish the play, but told him it wouldn't have counted if it had gone in. The puck has to be in continuous forward motion during the penalty shot/shootout attempt. The only exception to the forward motion issue is if the puck hits the post, comes out and bounces into the goal off the goalie. Anything else, no goal.

Unless your ref doesn't know the rules, then it's a goal. There's some dumb refs out there, I had one allow a goal on a penalty shot on the rebound shot...luckily the other ref overturned it and told the guy what the rule really is.

There was a similar play in the NHL this year during a shootout, which the referee allowed. Kelly Hrudey's take on it was "as long as the player is in possession of the puck and headed towards the goal line, they are going to allow it." I believe the actual situation was cutting across the crease, with the players stickhandling causing the puck to move away from the goal line.

[Kael]

Originally Posted by Redness

There was a similar play in the NHL this year during a shootout, which the referee allowed. Kelly Hrudey's take on it was "as long as the player is in possession of the puck and headed towards the goal line, they are going to allow it." I believe the actual situation was cutting across the crease, with the players stickhandling causing the puck to move away from the goal line.

I don't mind that. I think if the player is in constant forward motion with control of the puck, he should be allowed to do whatever he wants. Whether it's a spin-o-rama, or drop to a skate-kick self-pass. From what was described in the topic post, I'd say no-goal, as the player AND puck came to a complete stop.

Although showing the NHL rulebook to the ref won't do you a damn bit of good, you'd have to show him a USA Hockey rulebook.
I have a print out of the crease-rule that I can velcro inside my glove (laminated) if I need it. You could do the same with the shootout rules. Just make sure to include the page and paragraph info.

[TPS_Mike]

Are you sure the puck came to an absolute complete stop when he went to shoot? Because technically if it was hardly moving at all and he did this it would be legal. You really have no proof the puck was stopped 100%. No offense but the ref may have had a better angle on it.

[Jesse]

I had a pretty experience with this rule earlier this year.

It was the end of a tie game and we went into a shootout. The other team's final shooter comes up to try to save his team (my team was ahead 1-0 in the shootout). After a few dramatic circles around center ice, he readies himself a few strides behind the puck and takes off. In his haste, he bobbles the puck a bit, loses it, skates by it, which, in turn, allows the puck to make a full stop on the blue line. He stops abruptly, grabs the puck and hurries down the ice and fires a mean wrister in the, more or less, vacant net. I laughed and told both refs it was no goal. They agreed.

[TPS_Mike]

That seems really ****y to me, what would have happened if the refs had have counted it?

[Jesse]

Originally Posted by TPS_Mike

That seems really ****y to me, what would have happened if the refs had have counted it?

We would have moved on to extra shooters? It was the first game of the season in a really weak rec league in Utah. No one would have been offended and most folks just wanted to go home after the OT.