Around the NHL 2016-2017

[Doohicksie]

Yes. Also goalies should be more protected.

 

I'm going to be the voice of dissent here.  In this case, a penalty is clearly warranted, due to the way the hit was delivered.  BUT, I don't a goalie should be protected from a body check when he is below the goal line.  He is very clearly not goaltending back there as a goal can't be scored from back there.  If a goalie chooses to go below the goal line I think he should be subject to the same level of legal checking as any other player.

 

Monday night during overtime, Brian Flynn laid a solid body check on Tuukka Rask during the OT of Bruins/Habs when Rask came way out to the boards to play the puck.  No penalty, as it should be.

 

I think the same should be true behind the goal.  The counterargument is that the goalie is exposed because he has additional padding and is more likely to fall awkwardly, but that's my point:  If he's worried about getting hit, he shouldn't be back there in the first place.  I have no problem with him playing the puck back there to move the play along when there isn't an opposing player bearing down on him, but if someone is forechecking, the goalie shouldn't have any special status once he's out of the crease.

 

The point of the trapezoid is to increase scoring by keeping the goalie out of that zone.  I'm saying that while he shouldn't be totally banned from behind the goal, he should be fair game, subject to the same level of checking as any other player.  If the goalie was and goalies didn't go back there as much when opponents are in the zone, it would further increase scoring, no?

[JJFIVEOH]

I agree, he's fair game.

[dudacek]

I agree, he's fair game.

According to the rule book he is not fair game, but he should be.

Goalie should be zealously protected in his crease, but if he wants to play like a defenceman he should be treated like one.

Agree with Doohickie 100 per cent.

[LGR4GM]

No he shouldn't be fair game. What it is wrong with you guys?

Edited December 16, 2016 by LGR4GM

[WildCard]

Agreed, he's fair game back there. Still a pitiful response by the Rangers though. That was even worse than how we responded to Lucic

[LGR4GM]

He is not fair game. he is a goaltender who had his head almost separated from his body. Goaltenders should be more protected because they don't often play the puck or take hits. It is literally harder for them to avoid hits. This conversation is atrocious.  Lundvist is fair game because he is behind the net instead of in front of it? No. Absolutely insane.

 

Donald Trump's cabinet nominees are atrocious just like saying Lundvist has to protect himself... from having his head taken off by a head hunter. 

[LTS]

He is not fair game. he is a goaltender who had his head almost separated from his body. Goaltenders should be more protected because they don't often play the puck or take hits. It is literally harder for them to avoid hits. This conversation is atrocious.  Lundvist is fair game because he is behind the net instead of in front of it? No. Absolutely insane.

 

Donald Trump's cabinet nominees are atrocious just like saying Lundvist has to protect himself... from having his head taken off by a head hunter. 

 

A goaltender who is outside of the crease should be fair game for contact.  If they don't like it the crease can be where they stay.  They put the damn trapezoid in to prevent goaltenders from playing the puck and in turn attempting to increase the offense from it.  If a goaltender didn't leave his crease then it could potentially lead to even more offense.

 

The answer to the problem is simple.  Don't leave the crease and you won't get checked.  

 

There's nothing insane about it.  Why presume that a goaltender who acts as a 6th skater should not be treated like a 6th skater?

[LGR4GM]

A goaltender who is outside of the crease should be fair game for contact.  If they don't like it the crease can be where they stay.  They put the damn trapezoid in to prevent goaltenders from playing the puck and in turn attempting to increase the offense from it.  If a goaltender didn't leave his crease then it could potentially lead to even more offense.

 

The answer to the problem is simple.  Don't leave the crease and you won't get checked.  

 

There's nothing insane about it.  Why presume that a goaltender who acts as a 6th skater should not be treated like a 6th skater?

HE WASNT CONTACTED HE WAS BLOWN UP! THAT WASN"T A CHECK THAT WAS A DELIBERATE ATTEMPT TO INJURE. 

 

 

Goalie contact should be limited. He wasn't a 6th skater. All the checker had to do was come in and bump him or put a stick on him to force the pass. He came in and leveled him. Leveled a player who is not as agile skating as anyone else on the ice. It was disgraceful and Lundqvist is not a 6th skater, he is a goaltender dishing the puck behind the net, if he started skating up ice with it fine, but he wasn't.  

 

This place is bloodthirsty and the Dallas player should be gone for at least 10 games. 

If you think he is skater and that hit is something he should expect as a goalie, I don't want to support NHL hockey anymore. No reason to level a goalie in that situation. 

[Randall Flagg]

That looks like an elbow to the head. That wouldn't be allowed if it happened to a regular skater. Suspendable without having to get into the debate of how goalies playing the puck should be treated.

[SwampD]

That looks like an elbow to the head. That wouldn't be allowed if it happened to a regular skater. Suspendable without having to get into the debate of how goalies playing the puck should be treated.

Plus, he drove upwards, enough to leave his feet after the hit, which also is suspend-able.

[WildCard]

Alright so maybe the hit was bad, but I still think you should be able to make contact with the goalie outside the crease. Just if you do, you might get your ass beat

[pi2000]

I thought Eakin tried to squeeze between Lundqvist and the boards.    Lundqvist originally had the puck on his backhand with a Ranger player a few feet away.   At high speed you can see that Eakin anticipates that Lundqvist is going to make that pass and is trying to get to that Ranger player.    At the last second Lundqvist decides to keep the puck and tries to go forhand, but by then Eakin is already on top of him.    I don't blame Eakin for this one bit, sure in slow motion it looks much much worse, but at game speed that's just a hockey play where Lundqvist is at fault IMO.

[inkman]

I thought Eakin tried to squeeze between Lundqvist and the boards. Lundqvist originally had the puck on his backhand with a Ranger player a few feet away. At high speed you can see that Eakin anticipates that Lundqvist is going to make that pass and is trying to get to that Ranger player. At the last second Lundqvist decides to keep the puck and tries to go forhand, but by then Eakin is already on top of him. I don't blame Eakin for this one bit, sure in slow motion it looks much much worse, but at game speed that's just a hockey play where Lundqvist is at fault IMO.

All I heard was this...

 

[Randall Flagg]

I'm sure you'd be singing a different tune if it was beloved Moulson getting lit up like that, pi.

[TrueBlueGED]

I'm sure you'd be singing a different tune if it was beloved Moulson getting lit up like that, pi.

Oh please, everyone knows he's never close enough to the play at even strength to take a hit like that.

[pi2000]

I'm sure you'd be singing a different tune if it was beloved Moulson getting lit up like that, pi.

 

Moulson's not a goalie, if he was foolish enough to put himself in that position, then he deserves the hit.

 

Look, Lundqvist is getting up there in age... I know from personal experience that as you get older your reaction time slows down, it's a big reason King Henrik was a healthy backup for 4 straight.    He needs to shoulder some of the blame for putting himself in a vulnerable position... holding onto the puck too long, faking a pass, not giving the player any room to get by.  

 

You see that play all the time in the NHL, except normally the goalie gets out of the way quickly.    Unfortunately the NHL puts the onus on the player to try and avoid touching the goalie... which isn't always possible when you have an overaged goalie roaming around behind his net holding onto the puck faking passes.   

[Randall Flagg]

I'm just messing, pi. But you can't just level someone in the head because they're in your way, and they have the puck. That hit is illegal in every scenario. Non-head-contact without an elbow follow-through? Sure, let Hank get hit. But that hit never belongs in the league.

[LTS]

HE WASNT CONTACTED HE WAS BLOWN UP! THAT WASN"T A CHECK THAT WAS A DELIBERATE ATTEMPT TO INJURE. 

 

 

Goalie contact should be limited. He wasn't a 6th skater. All the checker had to do was come in and bump him or put a stick on him to force the pass. He came in and leveled him. Leveled a player who is not as agile skating as anyone else on the ice. It was disgraceful and Lundqvist is not a 6th skater, he is a goaltender dishing the puck behind the net, if he started skating up ice with it fine, but he wasn't.  

 

This place is bloodthirsty and the Dallas player should be gone for at least 10 games. 

If you think he is skater and that hit is something he should expect as a goalie, I don't want to support NHL hockey anymore. No reason to level a goalie in that situation. 

 

Okay, so what are we arguing.. this specific occurrence or the concept of goalies being legally hit when outside of the crease?

 

This hit, specifically, appears to be targeting the head and should be treated as the NHL would treat it.  

This hit, since it is illegal in the rule book, deserved the penalty that was called and the subsequent results.

 

The concept that a goalie can go outside of the crease with no fear of being contacted is what I was discussing.  If the rules are changed such that goaltenders can be checked when out to play the puck then I believe you'll see far less goaltender hits because they'll not wander behind the net and HOLD the puck knowing they won't get hit.

 

Any player who stood behind the net like that would get absolutely blown up as well and it would be legal and it would have nothing to do with their inability to get out of the way.

[Doohicksie]

Okay, so what are we arguing.. this specific occurrence or the concept of goalies being legally hit when outside of the crease?

 

This hit, specifically, appears to be targeting the head and should be treated as the NHL would treat it.  

This hit, since it is illegal in the rule book, deserved the penalty that was called and the subsequent results.

 

The concept that a goalie can go outside of the crease with no fear of being contacted is what I was discussing.  If the rules are changed such that goaltenders can be checked when out to play the puck then I believe you'll see far less goaltender hits because they'll not wander behind the net and HOLD the puck knowing they won't get hit.

 

Any player who stood behind the net like that would get absolutely blown up as well and it would be legal and it would have nothing to do with their inability to get out of the way.

 

THIS.  I keep wanting to respond to posts in this thread, but by the time I do, LTS covers all the ground I would want to, and does a better job than I would. :thumbsup:

[Taro T]

IMHO, the goalie should be completely off limits in the crease & should be subjectable to "beer league" checking outside the crease if he has the puck. Let him play it where he wants, realizing that the farther he has to go outside the crease to get to the puck, the greater the likelihood that he'll get popped.

 

Due to the nature of the equipment & how valuable the goalie is, he should be off-limits for a Pecaesque check. Unless he's a Bruin - in which case he should be Lucicable ANYWHERE on the ice, including the crease. ;) & regardless of where the puck is, too. :p

 

Again, just MHO.

[drnkirishone]

if the hit would be acceptable on a skater and the goalie is out of the crease playing the puck it should be legal to check them.

[WildCard]

if the hit would be acceptable on a skater and the goalie is out of the crease playing the puck it should be legal to check them.

Yup

[pi2000]

if the hit would be acceptable on a skater and the goalie is out of the crease playing the puck it should be legal to check them.

 

I don't believe Eakin did anything wrong, but I don't agree with this.

 

Eakin wasn't attempting to check Lundgvist.. he tries to squeeze between him and the boards, because Lundqvist acted like he was going to pass the puck on his backhand to the Ranger player 3 feet away from him in the corner (which he should have done).    Instead Lundqvist bobble the puck, doesn't move and Eakin has no choice but to run into him.    

 

Collisions happen in hockey, it's a fast game, it's about anticipation, there's no time to think and dissect a situation.    In Eakins defense the entire play (from when Lundqvist touched the puck to when he was hit) took less than 1 second (0.80s on my watch).   

 

As a former player, when you're in on the forecheck and you see the goalie playing the puck, you anticipate two things.... 

 

1 - he'll pass it to the closest outlet

2 - he'll immediately skate to the crease after moving the puck

 

....Eakin anticipated the easy pass on the backhand and that Henrik would dodge straight back to the net... so he took the only logical route to the puck which was along the boards.   

Edited December 16, 2016 by pi2000

[Doohicksie]

If Ryan Miller robbed convenience stores (note the wtf wave toward the end).

[bunomatic]

If Ryan Miller robbed convenience stores (note the wtf wave toward the end).

oh man. WTF !