Release from 07.01.2017

GOAL CLARIFICATION IN GAME VILLACH VS. VIENNA

Short text 168 CharactersPlain text

In Friday‘s game EC VSV against UPC Vienna Capitals, the late equalizer of the visitors caused some discussions. The Erste Bank Eishockey Liga clarifies this situation.

Press release 3024 CharactersPlain text

The EBEL and IIHF terminology for Rule 96 – ‘Goals with skates’ is as follows:
IIHF Casebook - RULE 96 – GOALS WITH THE SKATE 
Situation 1: An attacking player turns his skate to direct the puck into the goal net. 
Ruling: The goal shall be allowed provided there was no distinct kicking action. 
 
Situation 2: The puck contacts the moving skate of an attacking player and goes into the goal net. 
Ruling: The goal shall be allowed provided there was no distinct kicking action.
 
Based on the IIHF terminology and the EBEL Casebook – the Vienna 2nd goal with approximately 4 seconds left in the game is a goal.  It is not deemed a distinct kicking action/movement. For this specific example and how the EBEL League breaks this goal down:
 
The puck is passed/shot from 1 side of the ice on an angle in the direction to cross in front of the net.  The Vienna player (#91) is located just outside the goal crease.  As the video shows; the puck is approaching Vienna player (#91) at a high rate of speed and Vienna player (#91) begins the movement of his skate while the puck is in movement to him (Situation 2 in Casebook Rule above).  Once the puck contacts his skate - his skate remains on the ice, has minimal movement and his skate moves in a direction not directly at the net.  When the puck hits Vienna player (#91) skate, his foot motion is pointing directly at the VSV goalie located at the top of the goal crease.  The play is deemed ‘not a distinct kicking action’.
 
Based on 2 separate examples from this week and why 1 is considered a distinct kick and 1 is not:
Situation 1 - 03.01.17 – KAC – distinct kicking action
 


Situation 2  - 06.01.17 - Vienna – not a distinct kicking action
 
 
1) Puck movement:  
- Situation 1 – puck hits post and is moving away from net
- Situation 2 – puck is moving in a direction of net
 
2) Puck speed:
- Situation 1 – puck is moving with very little speed (considered puck controllable and time to create/react to kick the puck)
- Situation 2 – puck is moving at a high rate of speed (very difficult to control puck and difficult to time for a distinct kick)
 
3) Foot movement:
- Situation 1  - KAC player makes a distinct kicking action directly at the net with a puck that is considered able to control
- Situation 2 – VIE player makes a foot movement towards direction of puck in a reactionary move
 
4) Player to puck control
- Situation 1 – The puck is moving with little speed and the KAC player has time to control, direct and kick the puck
- Situation 2 – The VIE player is considered a ‘reactionary’ move to the puck and with the high speed of the puck, kicking the puck vs deflecting the puck off his skate is the main determination.  This is determined a skate deflection, not a distinct kick.
 
Each point individually, is not the sole determining factor. Points above are in general for a clarification as a whole. The basic analogy from League perspective – if it is not a distinct kicking motion – the League wants the goal to be allowed.
Print page Send link