Stars und Sternchen! » Canadiens game, video review

Got a question on rule clarification, comments on rule enforcements or some memorable NHL stories? Kerry wants to answer your emails at cmonref@tsn.ca! Hi Kerry, In Saturday nights game between the Canadiens and Flyers, there was a shot from PK Subban at the point that went wide and was stuck in the side of the net forcing a whistle. At this point, Montreal was on a power play and up 2-0 in the game. My question is, why did the face-off after this whistle stay in the Flyers end? If a shot from a Canadiens player goes over the glass or onto the back of the net and is blown dead, the face-off should come outside, shouldnt it? I am just wondering how this case is different as it did not touch a Flyers player before becoming lost in the side of the net. This was a very pivotal point in the game as the Canadiens scored shortly after the next draw which remained in the Flyers zone, putting the game pretty much out of reach. Thanks for taking the time to answer my e-mail and I look forward to your response. Brett WalkerMelita, MB Brett, You are correct in your understanding and interpretation of Rule 85 - Puck Out of Bounds. The ensuing face-off should have been conducted on the neutral zone spot nearest to the Flyers blue line once the puck became lodged under the protective netting skirt directly off the shot by PK Subban (which was not deflected by a Flyers player or goalie Ray Emery). Im giving the game officials a free pass on this one as a result of some miscommunication they apparently received during the video review process from the situation room. You need to give them a pass this time around as well! First, you need to understand the variations in the rule that could apply in this situation. The overriding premise regarding face-off location when a puck goes out of bounds or becomes unplayable is to provide the team at fault with the least amount of territorial advantage. An unplayable puck is one that becomes lodged in the netting on the outside of either goal. This understanding is verified in Rule 85.5 - "Should an attacking player cause the puck to go out of play or become unplayable in the attacking zone, the face-off shall take place at a neutral zone face-off spot or at a face-off spot in the zone from which the puck left the ice, whichever is less advantageous to the attacking team. For a puck that is unplayable due to being lodged in the netting or as a result of it being frozen between opposing players, the resulting face-off shall be at either of the adjacent face-off spots unless in the opinion of the Referee, the stoppage was caused by the attacking team, in which case the resulting face-off shall be conducted in the neutral zone…" PK Subban clearly caused the stoppage of play in this situation. (An exception to this rule is when the puck deflects off the goal post or crossbar, when cause by either team, either shot directly or deflected off any player or official, the face-off is always to be conducted in that end zone at the nearest face-off spot. Rule 85.1) The next logical question we ask is why the face-off remained in the Flyers end zone following video review and a lengthy conference between the Officials to determine puck drop location? We need to look no further than the explanation posted on the NHL Situation Room blog which states: "At 4:42 of the third period in the Flyers/Canadiens game, video review determined that P.K. Subbans shot entered through the side of the net. No goal Montreal." In looking at the replay, it is clear that the puck did not enter the net but was trapped on the outside of the mesh between the protective skirting. As a result of the Situation Room written explanation, it is only logical to assume that Referee Eric Furlatt would have been informed that the shot entered through the side of the net! Furlatt would communicate this information to his colleagues on the ice during their conference. Given this flawed information, the correct face-off location rule application (oxymoron) would be found in a portion of Rule 85.2 that states; "Should the puck go under the goal either from behind or the side or through the mesh from behind or the side, the ensuing face-off should take place at the nearest face-off spot in the zone nearest to the location where the play was stopped." That location would be in the Flyers end zone to the right of Ray Emery! Whatever the reason Brett, the incorrect face-off location resulted once PK Subban caused the stoppage of play in the attacking zone when his direct shot became caught in the outside netting and rendered unplayable. It would appear to have been lost somewhere in the communication. Ray Ban Sunglasses Sale Online . In this weeks Leaf Report podcast, James Mirtle and Jonas Siegel debate whether Toronto can continue their shootout dominance and discuss what Dave Nonis game plan should be heading into the trade deadline. Cheap Ray Ban Sunglasses Free Shipping . -- Officials have approved a deal to build a new $672 million stadium for the Atlanta Braves away from the downtown Atlanta area that has traditionally been its home. http://www.cheapraybanfreeshipping.com/ . Raymond, 31, started 15 regular-season games for the Stamps in 2013, racking up 51 tackles. He also returned two kickoffs for 79 yards including a 61-yarder. Cheap Ray Ban Sunglasses Wholesale . The mixed zone is not a place to make friends. Buy Cheap Ray Ban Online .com) - The game was all punts and field goals before Kodi Whitfields catch.Former Manchester City and Liverpool striker Mario Balotelli claims his relationship with Brendan Rodgers was a disaster. The Italy international, who left Liverpool in the last transfer window for French side Nice, revealed he had issues with Rodgers in a discussion about his former coaches.Balotelli praised former Inter and City boss Roberto Mancini, Jose Mourinho and Nice coach Lucien Favre, while having little to say on current Liverpool manager Jurgen Klopp, who let him leave Anfield. Mario Balotelli glares at Brendan Rodgers after the striker was substituted in a Liverpool match For me, the one most on the ball remains Mancini; fantastic, I owe him so much, Balotelli said when asked about his former managers.In second place I put Favre with Mourinho; to Portuguese is talented and motivated, its a pity we had a falling-out.The worst? Not Jurgen Klopp, I am not angry with him. If he has creaated a certain situation at Liverpool, maybe he should have had more patience with me.ddddddddddddIn truth I had the biggest disappointment with Rodgers. I enjoyed myself with him in training but our relationship was a disaster. Manchester Citys Italian manager Roberto Mancini (right) clashes with striker Balotelli The ex-Inter Milan forward spent three years at Manchester City before returning to Italy to play with AC Milan, prior to his surprise switch to Merseyside in 2014.But the 26-year-old never really settled at Liverpool, and he returned to AC Milan on loan after just one year.Upgrade to Sky Sports now to watch Man Utd v Arsenal this Saturday and get the first six months half price! Also See: Liverpool video Liverpool fixtures Liverpool stats Get a ￡10 free bet! China NFL Jerseys Cheap Nike NFL Jerseys NFL Jerseys Cheap Wholesale NFL Jerseys Cheap Basketball Jerseys Online Stitched Hockey Jerseys Wholesale Baseball Jerseys Football Jerseys Outlet College Jerseys For Sale Cheap MLB Jerseys Wholesale Soccer Jerseys Wholesale Jerseys For Sale Wholesale NFL Jerseys ' ' '