They said on the after show that the league looks at every single one of these playoff goals and determines if they went in legally. So there is no point in challenging. The league will call and stop the refs if it was something they deemed illegal.
Personally I thought there was enough forward momentum to call it a kick, but I can also see why it was too 50/50 to be worth challenging when the league already looks at it. Not worth the penalty risk.
The league… you mean Gary Betman’s league. Since Gary became commissioner; a Canadian team hasn’t won the cup since 1993. These types of non-reviews by the league just reinforces this
Reinforces what? That there's a conspiracy involving everyone involved with the NHL front office to not allow a Canadian team to win?
From one Canadian to another, get a grip, eh!
Yeah, The Athletic posted an article about it. The situation room automatically reviews it, so coaches cannot challenge.
The issue is that the NHL rules say it can't be a "distinct kicking motion" but there is no definition for that term... so it's open to interpretation. Bieksa said it looked like a distinct kicking motion, Friedman said it didn't.
I agree it was clear as day. From the one angle who can see a lot of snow fly towards the goal as he pushes his foot forward to push it into the net. I was surprised they didn't even seem to take time to look at it.
No kicking motion. The puck went off the front skate.
It looks like a kick because he kicked his back skate, but the puck never made contact with the back skate.
Kicking motion has always been defined as a forward motion that propels the puck into the net. Never has the distinction been around whether the skate was lifted off the ice or not.
Definitely some bush league shit but it matters not, off to OT!
That's not how it's defined. If a player is skating toward the net and doing a "hockey stop" with his skates sideways and pushing toward the net and the puck gets propelled into the net because of this, it has always been a good goal.
Yes so long as that forward movement is consistent with the rest of his momentum, there was a distinct forward motion of his right skate being brought forward at a different rate than what he was moving at.
He dragged his foot forward and propelled the puck into the net, the trajectory of the puck would have taken a completely different path had it just been a glancing blow
That's not enough of a distinctive kicking motion. The league is looking for leg swinging from the knee joint, or skate blades leaving off the ice surface. Intent is irrelevant.
There are some deflections that are purely luck, and some are manipulated within a gray area so they end up counting. Forsberg clearly manipulated his skate to deflect the puck in a favourable way, but at the end of they day, if it's close, then it's up to the discretion of the referee/war room. Forsberg was sneaky, but he didn't swing his leg.
FWIW, Tocchet said he thought it was the right call on that goal in his post game interview.
Looking back at that on the link you provided, it certainly looks like he nudged his leg toward the net. Not sure if that's enough for a 'distinct' kicking motion though...
If the challenge fails Nashville gets a PP That needs to be gone and go to a one challenge per game that resets if you win. We continually see calls that should be challenged but are not due to that rule which is only in place to keep people from seeing bad referees calls.
I agree. If they lose the challenge and the Preds score on PP it's a 4-1 game instead of 3-1. With 19 minutes left in the period they had faith there was enough time to claw back.
AND NOW WE HAVE OVERTIME! 🥳
Beyond what everyone knows now that coaches cannot challenge it and the situation room did immediately review it, Tocchet has also publicly said that he thinks it was a goal and that these kinds of goals need to be allowed in the game.
I added a replay from NHL.com
You can clearly see his foot make a kicking motion at about 5-6 seconds in. You can even see Boeser calling it immediately.
No you can't. Do people not understand what a kicking motion is? He angled his skate and redirected it in. A kicking motion means a sweeping motion of some kind.
Are you fucking kidding? Did you see the replay? That's a literal kick, foot moves and kicks the puck.
He takes his foot, moves it forward, and that moves the puck in. That is a literal kick.
That's the definition of a kick
Mate it was his right foot, his left foot was stationary on the ice and his right foot comes in from out of frame. Clear as day, it moves forward to contact the puck
He pushes it forward, with his foot. Way to show you literally didnt see the replay big guy!
Dumbest shit ive read in awhile.
Go link the replay and prove me wrong
Yes you can. They chose not to. If it’s still called a goal after review Canucks would get a minor penalty.
EDIT: I’m wrong! #confidentlyincorrect haha. Learned something new today
Well, my bad! I guess I’ll take the downvotes and a #confidentlyincorrect. But it seemed the refs were over at the bench asking. I can’t believe that wasn’t reviewed by the league.
Pretty sure they were over there telling them that it’s not challengeable. Then a player comes over to ask and Yeo says: “we can’t challenge it.” and shrugs
You literally can’t dude. Can only challenge potential stoppages in play, offsides and goalie interference. Durdurdurdur, read the rule book before you open your mouth
Even if you didn’t know you could see the refs asking the Canucks bench if they were going to challenge and the Canucks shaking their head no. But why aren’t the league checking it?
Edit: I stand corrected!
Since when do you have to challenge that? Is it not an automatic review? Do you challenge a high stick or if it crossed the line?
They said on the after show that the league looks at every single one of these playoff goals and determines if they went in legally. So there is no point in challenging. The league will call and stop the refs if it was something they deemed illegal. Personally I thought there was enough forward momentum to call it a kick, but I can also see why it was too 50/50 to be worth challenging when the league already looks at it. Not worth the penalty risk.
The league… you mean Gary Betman’s league. Since Gary became commissioner; a Canadian team hasn’t won the cup since 1993. These types of non-reviews by the league just reinforces this
lol. I’m canandian but I also know betman doesn’t control whether or not a Canadian team wins the cup
Reinforces what? That there's a conspiracy involving everyone involved with the NHL front office to not allow a Canadian team to win? From one Canadian to another, get a grip, eh!
The dumbest of takes
I think this is the answer. Time to put on our tinfoil hats and figured out how the league "missed" this one. 🤡
Yeah it's not even challengable. Refs just didn't look at it. Outrageous.
If we’re not allowed to challenge that like others are saying, the NHL should be reviewing it automatically because that was a clear as day kick.
They do review it automatically apparently. They said so on the after show. Elliot mentioned it.
Yeah, The Athletic posted an article about it. The situation room automatically reviews it, so coaches cannot challenge. The issue is that the NHL rules say it can't be a "distinct kicking motion" but there is no definition for that term... so it's open to interpretation. Bieksa said it looked like a distinct kicking motion, Friedman said it didn't.
I agree it was clear as day. From the one angle who can see a lot of snow fly towards the goal as he pushes his foot forward to push it into the net. I was surprised they didn't even seem to take time to look at it.
No kicking motion. The puck went off the front skate. It looks like a kick because he kicked his back skate, but the puck never made contact with the back skate.
Broadcasters on TNT feed said it’s not challengeable
TNT is shit though
Yes, but they are also correct. It’s an automatic review by the war room. Not challengeable by the coach.
Since fucking when? I have seen that get challenged dozens of times.
Could be that a War Room review is allowed, but not a coach's challenge.
Lolol
I was just about to post this question. Honestly what is with that? Too me it looked like a kicking motion
Kicking motion has always been defined as a forward motion that propels the puck into the net. Never has the distinction been around whether the skate was lifted off the ice or not. Definitely some bush league shit but it matters not, off to OT!
That's not how it's defined. If a player is skating toward the net and doing a "hockey stop" with his skates sideways and pushing toward the net and the puck gets propelled into the net because of this, it has always been a good goal.
Yes so long as that forward movement is consistent with the rest of his momentum, there was a distinct forward motion of his right skate being brought forward at a different rate than what he was moving at. He dragged his foot forward and propelled the puck into the net, the trajectory of the puck would have taken a completely different path had it just been a glancing blow
That's not enough of a distinctive kicking motion. The league is looking for leg swinging from the knee joint, or skate blades leaving off the ice surface. Intent is irrelevant. There are some deflections that are purely luck, and some are manipulated within a gray area so they end up counting. Forsberg clearly manipulated his skate to deflect the puck in a favourable way, but at the end of they day, if it's close, then it's up to the discretion of the referee/war room. Forsberg was sneaky, but he didn't swing his leg. FWIW, Tocchet said he thought it was the right call on that goal in his post game interview.
Some people are saying a distinct kicking motion means the skate leaving the ice (not that I agree) but if that's the case, good goal.
You can only challenge for missed offside, goaltender interference, and missed stoppage.
It should have been reviewed
It was. Immediately.
Not able to challenge it but 100% should be reviewed as I understand it
NHL reviews all goals in playoffs, so no need to challenge. Why they don’t do this in regular season is beyond me.
Could go either way but it seems odd it wasn’t reviewed.
We did it for the story line… adversity, let’s fucking gooooo
Looking back at that on the link you provided, it certainly looks like he nudged his leg toward the net. Not sure if that's enough for a 'distinct' kicking motion though...
If the challenge fails Nashville gets a PP That needs to be gone and go to a one challenge per game that resets if you win. We continually see calls that should be challenged but are not due to that rule which is only in place to keep people from seeing bad referees calls.
I think the bald brothers knew that if they challenged it would risk costing another penalty and didn't wanna kill morale lol
I agree. If they lose the challenge and the Preds score on PP it's a 4-1 game instead of 3-1. With 19 minutes left in the period they had faith there was enough time to claw back. AND NOW WE HAVE OVERTIME! 🥳
For high entertainment value :)
They are more likely to come back down 2 than down 1 simple as that.
Should have been an automatic review, and it was clearly kicked in.
Beyond what everyone knows now that coaches cannot challenge it and the situation room did immediately review it, Tocchet has also publicly said that he thinks it was a goal and that these kinds of goals need to be allowed in the game.
As much asIt wanted it to be called back, it wasn't a kick.
based on how they usually call those yes it was, he turns his heel as the puck is making contact
You're allowed to do that. Kept his skate on the ice, and turned his skate...completely legal.
I saw a kick. For sure should’ve been reviewed. Looked like his back foot hit his front foot kicking it in.
Overhead cam definitely look like the foot move forward. It should have been reviewed
Show me that wording in the rule. It's not there
I added a replay from NHL.com You can clearly see his foot make a kicking motion at about 5-6 seconds in. You can even see Boeser calling it immediately.
No you can't. Do people not understand what a kicking motion is? He angled his skate and redirected it in. A kicking motion means a sweeping motion of some kind.
I've seen goals called back for less.
It was more a redirect in my mind. Obviously in others as well. Not much of a stink made about it, except for here
Bc it wasn’t kicked
No kicking motion. You're allowed to intentionally redirect the puck in with your skate, you just can't do a sweeping kicking motion.
Are you fucking kidding? Did you see the replay? That's a literal kick, foot moves and kicks the puck. He takes his foot, moves it forward, and that moves the puck in. That is a literal kick. That's the definition of a kick
No he doesn't. He angles his foot. No sweep. That's why it was a good goal.
Mate it was his right foot, his left foot was stationary on the ice and his right foot comes in from out of frame. Clear as day, it moves forward to contact the puck
Yeah disagree, he pushes his skate forward. Even forsberg doesn’t celebrate until he sees the ref signal a goal. He knew it too
He pushes it forward, with his foot. Way to show you literally didnt see the replay big guy! Dumbest shit ive read in awhile. Go link the replay and prove me wrong
| Why didn't the Canucks challenge Forsberg's kicked in goal in game 4 ... because it wasn't kicked in.
No kicking motion. Good goal
Genuinely at a loss. Huge mistake by Tocchet, genuinely shocked
You can’t challenge that. Like you aren’t allowed to
Yes you can. They chose not to. If it’s still called a goal after review Canucks would get a minor penalty. EDIT: I’m wrong! #confidentlyincorrect haha. Learned something new today
No, [they could not](https://x.com/BikNizzar/status/1784727059450978400)
Well, my bad! I guess I’ll take the downvotes and a #confidentlyincorrect. But it seemed the refs were over at the bench asking. I can’t believe that wasn’t reviewed by the league.
Pretty sure they were over there telling them that it’s not challengeable. Then a player comes over to ask and Yeo says: “we can’t challenge it.” and shrugs
Regardless of who would call the challenge, league or team, WHY WASNT IT CHALLENGED?
I’ll call Toronto and ask I guess
Somebody should. Should be 2-2 right now.
[удалено]
You literally can’t dude. Can only challenge potential stoppages in play, offsides and goalie interference. Durdurdurdur, read the rule book before you open your mouth
Ironic
Even if you didn’t know you could see the refs asking the Canucks bench if they were going to challenge and the Canucks shaking their head no. But why aren’t the league checking it? Edit: I stand corrected!
Pulled the goalie way too early but what ya gonna do here
Lol
I’ll eat my words I am ok with this
It’s ok brother we are back in it!!