Hockey question - What's the "crease"?

Discussion in 'After Hours Lounge (Off Topic)' started by Keith Mickunas, Apr 24, 2003.

  1. Keith Mickunas

    Keith Mickunas Cinematographer

    Joined:
    Dec 15, 1998
    Messages:
    2,041
    Likes Received:
    0
    OK, I keep hearing comments about how Brett Hull's goal to win the cup in '99 shouldn't have counted because "he was in the crease"? I see players in the goalie's area all the time when they don't have possession of the puck. What was so special about Hull?

    I'm watching the Star's game right now, its during the 6th intermission. During the 3 OT a goal was disallowed becaue the net was dislodged. The thing is the Anaheim player that dislodged the net was clearly in the blue area and it was another Anaheim player that was hitting the puck off Turco. So even if people claim the goal should've been allowed, which I think it probably should, wasn't the guy in the crease which would have disallowed the goal?
     
  2. mike caronia

    mike caronia Second Unit

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 1999
    Messages:
    417
    Likes Received:
    0
    The crease rule changed after that season. At the time, any goal scored when the opposition had as much as a toe in the crease was disallowed. Every goal except the tainted Stanley Cup winning goal that year. If you're ever in Buffalo, don't bring up this subject!

    This game is unbelievable. Headed to the 5th OT.
    If Anaheim loses it's a disgrace to the NHL. The goal should have counted.
     
  3. Keith Mickunas

    Keith Mickunas Cinematographer

    Joined:
    Dec 15, 1998
    Messages:
    2,041
    Likes Received:
    0
    I heard the Buffalo folk keep whining about it.

    I just heard the ESPN guys saying they found that if the net is dislodged at all before the puck crosses the line its disallowed, or something like that. Strangely strict interpretation of the rule considering some of the calls tonight.
     
  4. Shane Bos

    Shane Bos Second Unit

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2002
    Messages:
    256
    Likes Received:
    0
    well at least Anaheim won the game just into the 5th OT. The net being dislodged is not a hard fast rule if under the referee's discretion the defensive player knocked it off the goal can still stand. At the very least a Delay-of-Game penalty should have been called.
     
  5. Jeff Gatie

    Jeff Gatie Lead Actor

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2002
    Messages:
    6,531
    Likes Received:
    15
    Definately one of the stupidest rules in the history of the NHL (cough - Bruins vs. Caps in overtime - cough). Stupid because it was based on the premise that goalies were "getting run" and injured. Thing is, the NHL believed this was true without checking the stats. When they finally looked at the stats, in one year 17 goalie injuries that led to missed games were recorded, none, zip, zero, nada of which were due to being run. Also, it allowed the referee "discretion" as to whether he should "send it upstairs". A ref with common sense would not "send it upstairs" if a guy had a toe in the crease (cough - Bruins vs. Caps in overtime - cough), but the stupid refs refused to use discretion and always sent it upstairs, where no discretion was possible. Once the replay was used, if the guy was over the line - no goal. Stupid stupid rule!

    Today the rule is what it is supposed to be, you can sit on the goalie's doorstep as long as you do not physically interfere with him at the time of the save.

    As far as the net dislodging, a goal is disallowed if the net is dislodged at the time of the puck crossing the line. Penalties may ensue if it is felt the defender did it on purpose or an offensive player was pushed into the net by the defending team.

    And as far as protecting goaltenders is concerned, that's what defensemen are for. To paraphrase Chris Nilan - It's a tough sport, even (goalies) have to bleed sometimes.
     

Share This Page