• Moderators, please send me a PM if you are unable to access mod permissions. Thanks, Habsy.

GDT: Canes v. Jackets 12/15 5:00

Going back to that hand pass/no goal call...here is the official rule on hand passes as written. In the NHL rulebook:

79.1)Hand Pass - A player shall be permitted to stop or “bat” a puck in the
air with his open hand, or push it along the ice with his hand, and the
play shall not be stopped unless, in the opinion of the on-ice officials,
he has directed the puck to a teammate, or has allowed his team to
gain an advantage, and subsequently possession and control of the
puck is obtained by a player of the offending team, either directly or
deflected off any player or official.

Its not enough that the puck merely hit something after being batted down. You need to do something with the puck after batting it down (ie.play it with your stick or intentionally kick it to a teammate). That the puck deflected off the shaft of Jost's stick after he batted it down doesn't negate the hand pass. If Jost had intentionally bunted the puck with the shaft of his stick or lifted his stick and hit it with the shaft, then it wouldn't have been a hand pass. But the replay showed the puck just happened to hit the shaft of his stick. Not good enough to negate the hand pass.

So I take it back, the right call was made.
 
Last edited:
polarbare said:
Reviews should be 60 seconds; if they can't make a clear determination in 60s, then there isn't a clear determination.
Click to expand...
That and one other thing that bothers me about challenges. The referees camped out at the Jackets bench waiting for them to decide whether to challenge it. Especially on the hand pass, play went on for 20 seconds after the faceoff. If you can’t find it in real time, your video team sucks.
 
andyt said:
That and one other thing that bothers me about challenges. The referees camped out at the Jackets bench waiting for them to decide whether to challenge it. Especially on the hand pass, play went on for 20 seconds after the faceoff. If you can’t find it in real time, your video team sucks.
Click to expand...
100% agree on this. Give the team some minimum amount of time and move on.
 
andyt said:
That and one other thing that bothers me about challenges. The referees camped out at the Jackets bench waiting for them to decide whether to challenge it. Especially on the hand pass, play went on for 20 seconds after the faceoff. If you can’t find it in real time, your video team sucks.
Click to expand...
It's like calling a goal back for offsides that occurred 30s before the goal when they're off by an inch or two maximum; that did not influence the goal.
 
cmaleski2 said:
Going back to that hand pass/no goal call...here is the official rule on hand passes as written. In the NHL rulebook:

79.1)Hand Pass - A player shall be permitted to stop or “bat” a puck in the
air with his open hand, or push it along the ice with his hand, and the
play shall not be stopped unless, in the opinion of the on-ice officials,
he has directed the puck to a teammate, or has allowed his team to
gain an advantage, and subsequently possession and control of the
puck is obtained by a player of the offending team, either directly or
deflected off any player or official.

Its not enough that the puck merely hit something after being batted down. You need to do something with the puck after batting it down (ie.play it with your stick or intentionally kick it to a teammate). That the puck deflected off the shaft of Jost's stick after he batted it down doesn't negate the hand pass. If Jost had intentionally bunted the puck with the shaft of his stick or lifted his stick and hit it with the shaft, then it wouldn't have been a hand pass. But the replay showed the puck just happened to hit the shaft of his stick. Not good enough to negate the hand pass.

So I take it back, the right call was made.
Click to expand...
My only issue was that it was unclear to me if it was just Jost hitting the puck with his hand or whether a Columbus player also made contact with the puck with his hand. They both swatted at the thing. I'm not sure I ever saw it all that plainly, but ... whatever. The timing issues sucked and they handled both of those challenges poorly IMO. Not because they're favoring one or the other team, but mostly just because they're both morons.
 
On the non-ref portion of the game, I thought Carolina at least played better throughout even if it wasn't flawless or anything. More guys had plus game scores than they've had in a game for a couple of weeks now. They lost control of the flow for good chunks of the game though, and allowed more clean looks on net than I think the Canes would have preferred ... especially with what amounts to your 4th goalie in net. Tokarski looks like an over-stuffed couch cushion out there, but he moved well and tracked the puck well for a guy playing his first NHL game in quite awhile. Decent job by him. Get some new pads though, bud. Not digging the Sabres colors ... bad mojo there.

On the lines, I do think Rod needs to stick with keeping Aho and Jarvis together and keeping Svech with Necas. Shift around the other stuff if you must, but those two forward pairs consistently work.
 
Tokarski said postgame that the new gear in appropriate colors is on the way, but he’s been playing well and you know how superstitious goalies are…
 
jeffbear said:
On the non-ref portion of the game, I thought Carolina at least played better throughout even if it wasn't flawless or anything. More guys had plus game scores than they've had in a game for a couple of weeks now. They lost control of the flow for good chunks of the game though, and allowed more clean looks on net than I think the Canes would have preferred ... especially with what amounts to your 4th goalie in net. Tokarski looks like an over-stuffed couch cushion out there, but he moved well and tracked the puck well for a guy playing his first NHL game in quite awhile. Decent job by him. Get some new pads though, bud. Not digging the Sabres colors ... bad mojo there.

On the lines, I do think Rod needs to stick with keeping Aho and Jarvis together and keeping Svech with Necas. Shift around the other stuff if you must, but those two forward pairs consistently work.
Click to expand...
Not sure if it his style or he was told to park his butt around the goal, but it was clear this was the plan.
 
Yeah, I can't remember seeing Tokarski play other than during that Checkers' Cup run, and that's been a hot minute. But I seem to recall that he was very much a get the body in the way of the shot kind of keeper. It's weird, because the Canes have used 4 guys* in net and they honestly couldn't be more different.

Andersen ... cool, calm technician working the angles and reading the play. Very much a JS Giguere clone.
Kooch ... wildly aggressive, unpredictable decision making but otherwise a classic butterfly guy. Reminds me of Irbe way too much.
Martin ... different kind of wild man, mostly looking to get any available body part in front of pucks. Lots of Superman leaps and flailing limbs.
Tokarski ... classic cushioned trash can. Play deep, get square, absorb shots.


*yeah, yeah ... Perets played one game in relief, please let me forget him in peace
 
One thing I noticed in the replays - his 5 hole was open. Their shots were mostly high into the chest area. I think other teams will keep the puck down and try to exploit the opening.
 
A day or two late on this post, but I liked Tokarski's quietly solid play between the posts. He did give up a few rebounds, but most of them were absorbed or dropped right in front of him where he could quickly cover up the puck. He looked like Tony Stark's original Iron Man, but he did his job very well on his first outing with the Canes.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top