Over 16,529,345 people are on fubar.
What are you waiting for?
: The direct, Black & White answer is found in the language of rule 63 that states, "when any player, while in his defending zone, shoots or bats (using his hand or his stick) the puck directly (non-deflected) out of the playing surface, except where there is no glass, a penalty shall be assessed for delaying the game." We know that any player also includes the goalkeeper. If, in the act of making a save, the goalie deflects or directs the puck over the glass with his blocker or stick a penalty would NOT be assessed under this rule. What Tim Thomas did does not constitute making a save or clearing the puck even though he was within his crease. Tims big bat hit it out of the park; even in Fenway (FYI: Bill
Smith, my new Ottawa beer league goalie friend shouldnt want to delay the game by batting pucks over the glass because it cuts into post game dressing room time to have a “tall, cold one”! You should also know that your New York Islander name sake didnt use his paddle to knock pucks over the glass but bodies from his crease. Billy Smith was the best playoff goalie I ever saw when the money was on the line)! For those that want some truthful historical backgrounnd on puck over glass; I invite you to read on.dddddddddddd The modern day “Delay of Game Rule-shooting puck over the glass” was introduced, as I clarified in a recent “Cmon Ref” segment on TSN with James Duthie, in an attempt to bring about consistency in how this rule was (and wasnt) applied. I know many of you sitting in your arm chair referees crease are gagging on the premise of NHL Officiating being consistent, but hold on to your whistles for a second and ‘let me ‘splain Lucy!” The League wants more goals scored, right? Goals often result from sustained end zone pressure. Prior to the zero tolerance standards you now see applied on this rule, defending players would take the pressure off by dumping the puck over the glass to gain a stoppage. And while you didnt have be Einstein to know the player did it on purpose, the word deliberate found in the rule back then became an excuse for the referee (me included) to avoid the call in many situations. (Late in a game, score tied, overtime, second penalty, - on the flip side, all the things we are seeing happen now.) Back then the game situation often determined the assessment. As long as the puck was advanced up ice in some modest direction and over the glass the whistle was put away! The way it is now is much better. We were horribly inconsistent and thats the TRUTH. Have a field day with this one, boys and girls and enjoy the Stanley Cup playoffs with us on TSN... Update: 10:14pm et - Kerry-Cmon Ref back @ Techumseh: Thanks for writing. Please accept this as my personal act of confession to you for having missed the high stick by Wayne Gretzky on Doug Gilmours chin in Game 6 of the 1993 Western Conference Final. I am truly sorry and ask for you forgiveness and blessing, with hope that you can now move on... I guess you havent heard or read the countless times over the years that I have publicly admitted missing the play or read the whole chapter (The Missed Call) in my book entitled, "The Final Call," which was released last October from Wayne Gretzkys Restaurant in Toronto. I sincerely apologize. Can we be friends now that we are all human? I hope so! Update: 10:44pm et - Kerry-Cmon Ref back @ the_franchise31: If Alex Auld caught the puck on a dump in I can only assume that the closest attacker would have been at the blue line at best. Alex would have had more than sufficient time to drop the puck and make a play with it. The privilege of the goalie holding the puck is limited to three seconds unless he is being checked by an opponent and a delay of game penalty is assessed when he deliberately holds the puck in any manner which, in the opinion of the referee, causes an unnecessary stoppage of play under Rule 67.3. I think a dump in qualifies under this rule. Hope this helps. ' ' '
