It’s not about touching the puck. It’s about whether or not there was a shot and a rebound, or a loss of possession. Neither happened, so we have a good goal.
If that's the rule, I think it is not well known. Adjudicated as you described, there is a tough gray area: What differentiates a shot from a non-shot, and how much contact with what goalie equipment and in what directions suffices to claim a rebound?
I think forbidding further touch by the shooter after the goalie touch is much neater and makes more sense, rewarding the goalie for disruption of the attempt, which is the whole point, regardless of when a shot does or doesn't happen.
It's a good goal. The shooter is allowed a single shot on goal, so they can't go for their own rebound. He got a single shot off and scored. The argument that the goalie touched the puck thus the goal shouldn't count does not hold water, otherwise you could argue a shot going off the glove and in should not count because the goalie touched it. Obviously, the idea that if a goalie touches the puck any subsequent goal should not count is ridiculous. It's a good goal and should only be reviewed to see if the shooter was taking a second shot.
3 Comments
If that's the rule, I think it is not well known. Adjudicated as you described, there is a tough gray area: What differentiates a shot from a non-shot, and how much contact with what goalie equipment and in what directions suffices to claim a rebound?
I think forbidding further touch by the shooter after the goalie touch is much neater and makes more sense, rewarding the goalie for disruption of the attempt, which is the whole point, regardless of when a shot does or doesn't happen.
It's a good goal. The shooter is allowed a single shot on goal, so they can't go for their own rebound. He got a single shot off and scored.
The argument that the goalie touched the puck thus the goal shouldn't count does not hold water, otherwise you could argue a shot going off the glove and in should not count because the goalie touched it. Obviously, the idea that if a goalie touches the puck any subsequent goal should not count is ridiculous.
It's a good goal and should only be reviewed to see if the shooter was taking a second shot.
looks like a good goal to me. shoot outs should not be a part of hockey anyways, its the worst thing that happened to hockey IMO