In hindsight you could argue it's not even a kick, I was probably a bit too definitive – I think it is based on the follow through after he angles his foot, and that is how it would've been called. Nonetheless.
A few people brought this up. There was a kicking motion but it was not at the net and it went off a Winnipeg player and deflected on goal. If the kicking motion directed the puck toward the net I would say no goal. This goal is legit.
The puck wasnt heading toward the net. It wouldnt have gone in by itself. The goalie made the puck change direction and go toward the net. Its like the VGK goal against EDM the night before. If 29 for EDM didnt hit it, it wouldve just said through the crease and out the other side.
winnipeg is the last team that will get a proper call from bettman. bettman despises canada and always hated return of jets and city he tried to ki-ll off.
No……u are wrong dude. He did not propel the puck. The puck was propelled by the skate of the Dallas player…….not by Hellebucyk. That’s bullshit.
It should have been a non goal IMO, but I get why the refs thought otherwise. He seem'd to try to kick the puck to his stick, its kind of obvious since he tries to shoot it with his stick but it just bounces into the goal.
ANYONE STILL COMING TO THESE COMMENTS TO SAY IT WAS NO GOAL READ THIS:
Somehow people/jets fans are still coming to the comments, posting the rules, and somehow thinking they are still correct. You are not, it was a good goal.
I don’t know if it was a kick or not, but it actually doesn’t matter if it was. Let’s say Petro kicked it, the thing jets fans aren’t understanding when reading the rule is that the puck did not deflect off of Helle’s stick. HE SWUNG HIS STICK AT THE PUCK AND HIT IT. That’s it. That’s what negates any sort of kick and makes it a goal, an unofficial own goal.
If Helle’s stick was stagnant, and the puck deflected off it and went in, no goal. He tries to play the puck and just had bad luck. Good goal
I really don't get everyone defending it. First off no way a deflection carries that much velocity in the opposite direction it came from that's obviously a kick, secondly he did not kick from behind the goal line it's very clearly before it, thirdly helle never once tried to SHOOT it, he only tried to DEFLECT it or SAVE the puck. In no way or rule should this have been called a goal, what are goalies not allowed to save the puck anymore when it's kicked on net? I just don't understand how any higher up could call this a goal. Most frustrating playoffs yet with the officiating and rule bending someone needs to do something about it
Pretty cut and dry rule. Kicked puck does not count if it goes in off the goalie's stick. The rule has no stipulation about the goalie trying to make a play on the puck. By rule this goal should have been disallowed. Bad call. All other discourse, (Dallas would have won anyway, Winnipeg didn’t score again, etc) is irrelevant.
Referees are protecting their own gambling intrest. It will be an american team to win the cup. No calls on American teams but soft calls on canadian teams.
I’m not even convinced there was a kick. It looked to me like he just directed the puck by changing the angle of his foot. In addition, after the puck changed direction off his skate, it was going nowhere near the goal until it first deflected off of Barron and the off of Hellebucyk. And why he was flopping around like that I’ll never get.
Its true, but I feel for the jets fans. This is extremely unlucky. When you watch closely from the view high above goal, from behind it, shows the "kick" and the defending jets player swinging his stick and getting caught up with the stars player, but really closely the puck goes off of his stick or foot or both. Then it reaches hellybuyucks stick. Unbelievable.
So, Eck, let’s stretch your interpretation of the law further. That means when a goalie sees a kicking motion, whether it is just to kick the puck up to your stick and miss or not, they should now avoid attempting to make a save as by inadvertently contacting the puck with their stick it will now be a good goal. Or, if they inadvertently propel the puck from the kicking motion into the net by any means other than their stick it is not a good goal? How about just no kicking motion goals.
If you followed this analysis, basically you could make up any excuse to get around a rule. Oh yeah, they do that against Canadian teams all the time (the Bettman clause)
Are Jets fans furious at the referees? They should be furious at their team for getting outplayed, outscored, outworked on the PP and the PK and generally being the lesser team in a game where Dallas was the indisputably better team. The fact so much time is spent on one of the five goals they surrendered is nonsense.
So, my stick is tied up, I kick the puck, hard, at the net, I'm right in the crease; I mean I go full Pele on the rubber; the goalie scoops it in his glove, but it pops up and he bats it into the net trying to recover. Good goal?
Jets need to stop worrying about that 1 goal and start worrying about the other 21 Conner has given up in 4 road playoff losses….. the St Louis Blues beat the living snot outta the Jets physically and it is really showing this series… they look like they are out of fuel…….😊
Think about this: a puck shot out of play is a penalty because that doesn’t apply to deflections. Had the goalie knocked that puck out of play it would not have been a penalty. Therefore the play must be considered a deflection and therefore no goal.
41 Comments
In hindsight you could argue it's not even a kick, I was probably a bit too definitive – I think it is based on the follow through after he angles his foot, and that is how it would've been called. Nonetheless.
Kick or not deflection or not, Barron touches that puck with his stick right after the kick making it a good goal
What about the other 4 goals ???
A few people brought this up. There was a kicking motion but it was not at the net and it went off a Winnipeg player and deflected on goal. If the kicking motion directed the puck toward the net I would say no goal. This goal is legit.
It’s a kick but definitely goes in off the winnipeg d man and Helly so it’s fine here.
I’m far more concerned that 3 goalies on Canadian teams have been injured in this playoffs with a total of absolutely zero repercussions.
Taking a goalie out is series changing; it’s absolutely bullsjit
The puck wasnt heading toward the net. It wouldnt have gone in by itself. The goalie made the puck change direction and go toward the net. Its like the VGK goal against EDM the night before. If 29 for EDM didnt hit it, it wouldve just said through the crease and out the other side.
Good goal. Winnipeg is mad they are turning into loserpeg
winnipeg is the last team that will get a proper call from bettman. bettman despises canada and always hated return of jets and city he tried to ki-ll off.
No……u are wrong dude. He did not propel the puck. The puck was propelled by the skate of the Dallas player…….not by Hellebucyk. That’s bullshit.
It should have been a non goal IMO, but I get why the refs thought otherwise. He seem'd to try to kick the puck to his stick, its kind of obvious since he tries to shoot it with his stick but it just bounces into the goal.
Even then, the game would’ve ended up 4 to 2 they would’ve still lost go cry somewhere else
Typical Lawyer… Fool of S..t.
Jets are screwed over AGAIN.
ANYONE STILL COMING TO THESE COMMENTS TO SAY IT WAS NO GOAL READ THIS:
Somehow people/jets fans are still coming to the comments, posting the rules, and somehow thinking they are still correct. You are not, it was a good goal.
I don’t know if it was a kick or not, but it actually doesn’t matter if it was. Let’s say Petro kicked it, the thing jets fans aren’t understanding when reading the rule is that the puck did not deflect off of Helle’s stick. HE SWUNG HIS STICK AT THE PUCK AND HIT IT. That’s it. That’s what negates any sort of kick and makes it a goal, an unofficial own goal.
If Helle’s stick was stagnant, and the puck deflected off it and went in, no goal. He tries to play the puck and just had bad luck. Good goal
Wasn’t even a kicking motion
I really don't get everyone defending it. First off no way a deflection carries that much velocity in the opposite direction it came from that's obviously a kick, secondly he did not kick from behind the goal line it's very clearly before it, thirdly helle never once tried to SHOOT it, he only tried to DEFLECT it or SAVE the puck. In no way or rule should this have been called a goal, what are goalies not allowed to save the puck anymore when it's kicked on net? I just don't understand how any higher up could call this a goal. Most frustrating playoffs yet with the officiating and rule bending someone needs to do something about it
All I hear from Canada is waahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh
even if they didn't count the goal the stars still would've won 4-2 😑😑😑
Pretty cut and dry rule. Kicked puck does not count if it goes in off the goalie's stick. The rule has no stipulation about the goalie trying to make a play on the puck. By rule this goal should have been disallowed. Bad call. All other discourse, (Dallas would have won anyway, Winnipeg didn’t score again, etc) is irrelevant.
Where's that Toronto losing a 2-game lead video at? @EckHockey hiding.
Referees are protecting their own gambling intrest. It will be an american team to win the cup. No calls on American teams but soft calls on canadian teams.
I’m not even convinced there was a kick. It looked to me like he just directed the puck by changing the angle of his foot. In addition, after the puck changed direction off his skate, it was going nowhere near the goal until it first deflected off of Barron and the off of Hellebucyk. And why he was flopping around like that I’ll never get.
Its true, but I feel for the jets fans. This is extremely unlucky. When you watch closely from the view high above goal, from behind it, shows the "kick" and the defending jets player swinging his stick and getting caught up with the stars player, but really closely the puck goes off of his stick or foot or both. Then it reaches hellybuyucks stick. Unbelievable.
Furious at how much of a let down hellesuck and every american player on the Jets are.
So, Eck, let’s stretch your interpretation of the law further. That means when a goalie sees a kicking motion, whether it is just to kick the puck up to your stick and miss or not, they should now avoid attempting to make a save as by inadvertently contacting the puck with their stick it will now be a good goal. Or, if they inadvertently propel the puck from the kicking motion into the net by any means other than their stick it is not a good goal? How about just no kicking motion goals.
The puck wasn't kicked towards the net, it was directed toward a team mate.
Poor take.
couldn't happen to a nicer fan base.
If you followed this analysis, basically you could make up any excuse to get around a rule. Oh yeah, they do that against Canadian teams all the time (the Bettman clause)
Not the right call. It was a travesty
Any kicking motion should not be allowed. This is not soccer. You are wearing basically knives. On your feet, you should not be kicking them around.
Good video. Clearly a goal but if I was a Jets fan, I'd be furious too.
Phenomenal analysis and great way to cite and interpret the rulebook!!!
Are Jets fans furious at the referees? They should be furious at their team for getting outplayed, outscored, outworked on the PP and the PK and generally being the lesser team in a game where Dallas was the indisputably better team. The fact so much time is spent on one of the five goals they surrendered is nonsense.
So, my stick is tied up, I kick the puck, hard, at the net, I'm right in the crease; I mean I go full Pele on the rubber; the goalie scoops it in his glove, but it pops up and he bats it into the net trying to recover. Good goal?
As a jets fan that's a good goal
Jets need to stop worrying about that 1 goal and start worrying about the other 21 Conner has given up in 4 road playoff losses….. the St Louis Blues beat the living snot outta the Jets physically and it is really showing this series… they look like they are out of fuel…….😊
The dallas player wasnt the last person to touch it. How is this even a question? Do fans even know the rules anymore
What would be wrong with this goal? Hellebyuck redirected a puck into his net that was not going to go in. Cmon now
We coming for the cup after 26 years
Dead wrong, dude.
Think about this: a puck shot out of play is a penalty because that doesn’t apply to deflections. Had the goalie knocked that puck out of play it would not have been a penalty. Therefore the play must be considered a deflection and therefore no goal.