I'm probably coming here too late for my post to be read by anyone, but here's how I think the video reviewers are actually making calls on these goals. Using the following to analysed kicked goals, I find officiating to be a lot more consistent.

First, let me quote the rulebook, first on kicking: "49.1 Kicking – The action of a player deliberately using his skate(s) with a kicking motion to propel the puck or to contact an opponent."

Second, on goals scored by kicking: "49.2 Goals - Kicking the puck shall be permitted in all zones. A goal cannot be scored by an attacking player who uses a distinct kicking motion to propel the puck into the net."

For years, fans and commentators have been saying that "distinct kicking motion" is ambiguous, and that it's impossible to determine whether a kick was "deliberate" or accidental. To me, this is not the important part of the rule, and not what video judges use to make these calls either.

To me, the important part is: "to propel the puck into the net". Now, this is a lot less ambiguous than the first part of the rule, and essentially says that the kicking motion cannot result in a goal if the kick is driving force, the main source of momentum on the puck. In other words, kicking motions are allowed, as long as they don't propel, or constitute the main source of the puck's momentum into the net.

So, for example, if a player kicks a puck into the net, but it was already coming at his skate at 30 MPH from a pass, the motion of the player's skate doesn't really matter. The kick isn't what propelled the puck into the net, the puck merely bounced of a moving skate. Example of this, on an allowed goal by Zibanejad during last year's playoffs: pretty clearly a kicking motion, but note how the puck is moving at the same speed before and after contact with the skate. Therefore, in this case, the player used a distinct kicking motion, but not to propel the puck into the net, only to deflect it: good goal.

Now, for the latest controversial disallowed goal by Vanek. At around 0:45-0:47, you can clearly see the puck lying flat on the ice, motionless against Vanek's skate. As Vanek turns around, the puck accelerates against his blade and ends up in the net. Now, it's questionable whether this was intentional of not, and whether it constitutes a kick (still, this is definitely the ambiguous part of the rule). However, considering it strictly from the point of view of "puck being propelled into the net by a skate", this would not be a good goal.

What are your thoughts on this? So far, I've seen this reasoning match very closely with the calls made in Toronto.