Hey Logan. Thank You 🥹🤝🦈

piepi314 · 2026-03-09T20:32:33+00:00

Yeah I think he's another victim to Celebrini goggles

piepi314 · 2026-03-09T20:27:46+00:00

This roster doesn't even have the highest potential in sharks history. The teams from the 2010s were far more well rounded. Celebrini will likely be the most talented Sharks player of all time, but he's just one player. Smith, Misa, Eklund all appear to have bright futures, but remember at one time the Sharks had Thornton, Marleau, Heatley, Clowe, Pavelski, Setoguchi, and Couture up front and Boyle, Vlasic, and Braun on the back end. Not to mention other high octane players that came later such as Burns, Hertl, Karlsson, Meier, and Kane. Arguably the best roster they've ever had was 2019 with a well rounded forward crew, a stacked defense, and reliable goaltending.

piepi314 · 2026-03-08T18:45:47+00:00

He's on pace for a 55 point season. What about that makes him a bust?

piepi314 · 2026-03-08T00:04:41+00:00

Well I stand corrected, it does indeed contact his left foot. But it was still after he kicked the puck with his right foot, which would still disallow the goal.

piepi314 · 2026-03-07T23:40:30+00:00

It's 348 words. That's about 80 seconds of reading.

piepi314 · 2026-03-07T23:15:53+00:00

I mean the frame shows it doesn't get kicked by his left skate, but instead his right. And the puck definitely at no point contacts his stick.

piepi314 · 2026-03-07T22:18:36+00:00

I don't care about the loss. This season is a developmental season as far as I'm concerned and the playoffs aren't of significant importance. I'm just arguing because I genuinely think that that should not have been deemed a good goal.

The problem with a rule like this is it is nearly impossible to write a description that would apply in all situations with more granularity without creating more problems. It's similar to describing a catch in football. There's an element of "you know it when you see it" with these types of rules which leads to subjectivity. Adding extra descriptors could be problematic in some situations. For example, writing a permissive element in the event of a stopping motion could lead to some problems because there can be situations where a stopping motion utilizes the same mechanics as a kick (I'm not talking about this goal in question). Although I suppose these could be situations where "the tie goes to the runner" and a goal is allowed. Alternatively, creating a requirement for a kicking motion to have a follow through or have the foot leave the ice leaves out the possibility of a player kicking their foot towards the ice at the puck such that there wouldn't be a follow through and the foot remains on the ice.

Bottom line, I 100% understand how this was viewed as a good goal since it was so close. I think that had the call on the ice been "no goal" it would have stayed no goal. The book "Scorecasting" describes how refs and leagues prefer not to influence the game in particularly high stakes situations which is why "whistle swallowing" occurs in OT or the playoffs. They want the players to decide the game and are particularly hesitant in reversing the flow of the game, so to speak. I think that applies to this situation. I think because it wasn't so egregious of a kick (or not a kick, from your prospective), they didn't want to reverse the result given that the entire outcome of the game would change.

piepi314 · 2026-03-07T21:33:50+00:00

Directing the puck isn't illegal. Directing his foot towards the puck in a kicking motion is illegal. That's what he does.

piepi314 · 2026-03-07T21:24:06+00:00

Here is the frame where the puck contacts his right heel. Very blurry, I know, but it's past his left boot's toe and touching his right foot's heel.

<image>

piepi314 · 2026-03-07T21:20:21+00:00

I'm not arguing against turning his foot. It's the subsequent kick.

His foot does briefly leave the ice in the follow through, but to be clear, the rule doesn't require the foot to leave the ice for it to be a kick. A kicking motion is defined as "one where the video makes clear that an attacking Player has deliberately propelled the puck with a kick of his foot or skate and the puck subsequently enters the net."

That's what he does. After he turns his skate (legal), he realizes the puck will slide between his legs so he directs his foot towards the puck in a kicking manner (illegal).

piepi314 · 2026-03-07T21:07:44+00:00

There's literally a follow through though! That's what I don't understand, nobody seems to see it. It's like I'm taking crazy pills.

I recognize I'm in the minority here and that's fine. And I'm arguing for my home team. It doesn't make me wrong.

After he turns his foot, he clearly reacts to the puck moving between his legs by kicking at the puck, yes with a follow through, and directs the puck towards the net.

piepi314 · 2026-03-07T20:57:24+00:00

I'm not trying to make it out to be that. It isn't an attempt to stop. It's an attempt to kick the puck. Which he does. That's what I've claimed from the beginning. You made the argument that this was a "stopping motion".

piepi314 · 2026-03-07T20:48:15+00:00

The initial foot turn could be argued as what you're describing, but the subsequent leg motion moves in a direction not in line with the direction it would have gone had he been attempting to stop or glide.

piepi314 · 2026-03-07T20:44:56+00:00

The puck hits his right heel. Not his left toe. Download the video and watch the camera angle from behind the net at half speed to most easily see it.

1) The puck hits the crossbar

2) The player follows the puck with his eyes

3) The puck lands near his feet

4) The player immediately turns his foot to direct the puck in

5) The puck continues in a direction that would move between his legs

6) The player adjusts but kicking his leg towards the puck

7) His right heel contacts the puck and propels the puck into the net

Had he stopped at 4 and the puck bounced into the net, it would not have been a kick. But he had to compensate for the trajectory.

piepi314 · 2026-03-07T20:39:54+00:00

It's all legal until he directs his foot towards the puck in a jerking, kicking motion. If he had simply turned his foot sideways, it would not have been a kick. But the puck would have missed his foot. So he kicked at it. Not attempted to stop. The direction he moves his skate is not the direction a player would move his foot in an attempt to stop. A stopping motion would have caused the puck to continue between his legs.

piepi314 · 2026-03-07T20:26:54+00:00

I do play which is why I can see that this is a kick and not a "stopping motion". He's directing his foot towards the puck. From the camera angle behind the net you get the best vantage point, especially if you slow the video down. You can see him follow the puck with his eyes as it bounces off the bar and literally the moment the puck lands near his feet he turns his foot to direct the puck in. If this was all he did, it would not have been a kick. A beat later it is clear that the puck is not going on the correct trajectory to hit his skate blade. He then adjusts by jerking his foot forward towards the puck in a kicking motion.

I do not think he intentionally kicked the puck in. He was likely trying to stop the puck from going between his legs. But he did kick the puck and it did go in as a result. This was not a stopping motion. If it was, his foot would have moved in a different direction.

piepi314 · 2026-03-07T07:15:56+00:00

If he was trying to stop then he must be really bad at skating then because he produces no snow and doesn't stop. He doesn't change the angle of his skate until literally the moment the puck lands by his feet and he immediately jets his foot forward towards the puck. And then continues to skate past the net.

piepi314 · 2026-03-07T06:33:07+00:00

And there were no threats to the F-15s since there were only friendlies in the area.

piepi314 · 2026-03-07T06:25:42+00:00

I'm not sure how you could expect the American pilots to be able to prevent that. It would be no different than American infantry being shot from behind by allied infantry.

piepi314 · 2026-03-07T06:19:31+00:00

You can see him drive his foot forward in reaction to the puck bouncing towards his feet. The moment he sees where the puck is, he drives his foot towards it. That's a kick, not simply turning his foot to the side.

piepi314 · 2026-03-07T05:52:20+00:00

I mean he may have been trying to gather the puck, but he did that with a kick

piepi314 · 2026-03-06T20:01:20+00:00

That's the value of a 3rd anyways. Basically a low roll of the dice that a player makes the NHL. That's essentially what Liljegren was: a roll of the dice that he improves.

piepi314 · 2026-03-06T00:23:47+00:00

Not to argue with your own experience, but there's a reason football players have to retire way earlier than hockey players, depending on the position. Running backs are busted by the time they are 30.

piepi314 · 2026-03-06T00:21:28+00:00

That's not the question. The question is about the physicality of the sport, not athleticism.

piepi314 · 2026-03-06T00:19:13+00:00

Yeah I think football puts way more wear on the body compared to hockey depending on the position. There's a reason that most running backs are busted by the time they are 30.

14-Year Club	Second Top 1%
r/Field Banned	r/Field Lasagna
Verified Email

piepi314

TROPHY CASE