Hey Kerry, Just wondering about Rick Nash's goal last night. I believe it was Kevin Hayes who had a break away, which Price made a great save on however Hayes skate goes in behind Price's pad and drags him completely out of the net where Nash scores.
This play was challenged but the call stood. The Sportsnet commentators were stating that there was no intentional contact and did not believe it was interference. Could you explain this for me?
In my opinion when did intention have to be there for there to be an infraction? Errant sticks cut faces and knock out teeth all the time and they get 4 minute penalties surly most of these are unintentional. I expected to hear an explanation today on the sports highlights but all highlights skip the controversial goal. Thanks for your time, look forward to hearing your point of view...Jared Sweetapple
Thank you for submitting your question into the mail bag at kerryfraser.com
There was considerable chatter on twitter in real time from followers looking for an explanation that I will now provide in this forum.
To say that Rule 69 (Interference on the Goalkeeper) is complex and therefore open to varying judgments would be an understatement. The rule is three pages long and deals with various forms of incidental and deliberate contact with the goalkeeper, both inside and outside of the crease.
Hockey Night In Canada announcers Bob Cole and Gary Galley objectively analyzed the play throughout the Coach's Challenge process. While there was no guarantee as to what the referee's final judgment would be, Bob and Gary were correct in stating that it did not appear that Kevin Hayes initiated intentional contact. This does in fact have significant bearing as to the legality of Rick Nash's goal.
Since Hayes skate got caught up in Price's pad outside of the crease after the NY Rangers forward made a legitimate hockey play (deke), the contact would be regarded as accidental (incidental) versus deliberate. As such, the referee would apply the following paragraph from rule 69.1 subsection (2) which reads:
Goals should be disallowed only if:
(2) an attacking player initiates intentional or deliberate contact with a goalkeeper, inside or outside of his goal crease. Incidental contact with a goalkeeper will be permitted, and resulting goals allowed, when such contact is initiated outside of the goal crease, provided the attacking player has made a reasonable effort to avoid such contact. The rule will be exclusively enforced in accordance with the on-ice judgment of the Referee(s), but may be subject to a Coach's Challenge.
As Hayes fully extended his stick in an attempt to tuck the puck past Price on the far side, his right skate can be seen with a portion of the blade in contact with the goal crease line. Price's right pad protruded outside of the goalie's blue paint and directly in Hayes' path.
As Kevin Hayes executed a hockey play (deke) it is only reasonable to regard the impending contact with Price's leg/pad, outside the crease as incidental (non deliberate/intentional.
With regard to any potential question which some might pose as to whether Hayes made a "reasonable effort" to avoid contact with Price, it is key to the decision that both Hayes skate and Price's pad are positioned outside the crease. The type of play that Hayes was attempting required a wide skate position in order to execute and not for any deliberate purpose to interfere with the goalkeeper.
Price repositioned his right pad through the save resulting in a clamp effect to Hayes' skate and leg. This locked the two players together and eliminated Hayes ability to break free. Hayes momentum dragged Price with him outside the crease.
The next two screen grabs demonstrate Hayes inability to alter his path or break clear of goalkeeper's pad. Hayes could not step out of the accidental pad-lock with Price.
This is a clear example of incidental contact outside the goal crease, that while detrimental to Carey Price's ability to defend his goal, is not a violation of rule 69 - Interference on the Goalkeeper.
Unlike accidental high-sticking that results in a double minor penalty when injury occurs Jared, incidental contact with the goalkeeper outside of the crease can be allowed under certain conditions.