gebze evden eve nakliyat
Kukla's Korner Hockey - Kukla's Korner

Kukla's Korner

Kukla's Korner Hockey

Video- Penalty Shot Or Not?

What would you have called on this play? 

Martin Erat breaking in all alone, then the stick of Lubomir Visnovsky gets involved.

via the OC Register,

“If they’re going to call penalty shots for people slashing the stick or pushing on the hand and not hooking, then there’ll be a lot more penalty shots in the league this year,” Ducks coach Randy Carlyle said.

Filed in: NHL Teams, Anaheim Ducks, Nashville Predators, | KK Hockey | Permalink
  Tags: martin+erat


sjketcheson's avatar

No way.

Posted by sjketcheson from the floor of the Hasek on 11/10/11 at 10:33 AM ET

bezukov's avatar

I really think its time the press to be allowed into the referees’ locker room after the game.  These guys make so many dumb calls and it hurts the game.  It would be nice to hear that referee actually try and justify that penalty shot to reporters.  A little bit of embarrassment in the press might slow him down on the trigger a little bit.  Its pretty plain to everyone I know who watches hockey that the referees don’t face a lot of accountability for the product they put on the ice.  I think its time for a change.

Posted by bezukov from the kids are alright. on 11/10/11 at 12:01 PM ET


Not even close to a penalty let alone a penalty shot! However I find it a bit ironic that Carlyle whines so much about refereeing.

Posted by From The Hockey Wastelands from Cleveland on 11/10/11 at 12:07 PM ET

Rdwings28's avatar

One more time….NHL-“We have the best officials in professional sports, they have a difficult job in a very fast game…...blah, blah.”

Posted by Rdwings28 on 11/10/11 at 12:51 PM ET

MarkK's avatar

I don’t think it should have been called given the information we have, but I’ll play devil’s advocate a little.

I don’t think the d-man was in any position to affect Erat’s shot, legally or illegally.  That said, from that ref’s point of view he had no idea what that horizontal stick was doing in Erat’s right armpit.  The replay angle was incredible. Try to watch the replay and cover up the the outline of Erat’s body with a finger (which will approximate the refs point of view). The stick maneuver looks like a perfectly timed ‘stick check’ to the armpit.

Posted by MarkK from Maryland on 11/10/11 at 01:02 PM ET

Nate A's avatar

Wow, that was really really weak. Stick might’ve been horizontal for brief moments, but not for anywhere near long enough to do anything meaningful. Bad call.

Posted by Nate A from Detroit-ish on 11/10/11 at 01:30 PM ET


this same call was made on the hawks this year. lets go to the rule book:

There are four (4) specific conditions that must be met in order for the Referee to award a penalty shot for a player being fouled from behind. They are:

(i)  The infraction must have taken place in the neutral zone or attacking zone, (i.e. over the puck carrier’s own blue line);

(ii)  The infraction must have been committed from behind;

(iii)  The player in possession and control (or, in the judgment of the Referee, clearly would have obtained possession and control of the puck) must have been denied a reasonable chance to score (the fact that he got a shot off does not automatically eliminate this play from the penalty shot consideration criteria. If the foul was from behind and he was denied a “more” reasonable scoring opportunity due to the foul, then the penalty shot should be awarded);

(iv)  The player in possession and control (or, in the judgment of the Referee, clearly would have obtained possession and control of the puck) must have had no opposing player between himself and the goalkeeper.

ok number one, sure yes, number two sure sure, number three…oh wait, he had a reasonable scoring opportunity, could there have been a more reasonable scoring opportunity? i really dont think so, maybe if the defending player wasnt there at all. The rule is that the foul has to be the reason he didnt get a better scoring opportunity. In this case the back pressure prevented him from getting a better move off…not the foul. The rule doesnt state that he has to have the same chance on goal as if the defending player NEVER EXISTED…

terrible call, I dont like either team so its hard to feel sympathy for either side, but I am having trouble even saying that would have been a solid hooking or slashing minor. On the PP, give him 2 for hooking and call it a day.

Posted by pstumba on 11/10/11 at 02:19 PM ET


Whats funny, is this one was a terrible call, slight hand slash, “Penalty Shots for All!”
He scores on the penalty shot. Ten secs later he gets another breakaway and this time really gets taken down, now this one could have been a penalty shot, much more than the 1st. They could have given Erat 2 Penalty shots in the course of 10 secs.
Now that would have been great.

Posted by RyanS on 11/10/11 at 02:38 PM ET

JBytes's avatar

... from that ref’s point of view he had no idea what that horizontal stick was doing in Erat’s right armpit.

Referees are supposed to call what they see, not what they imagine.

Posted by JBytes on 11/10/11 at 02:51 PM ET


Right decision!

Erat got hooked at the moment he wanted to shoot the puck. He was about 10 feet from the goalie with no defenseman between him and the net.

Please tell me how this could NOT be a penalty shot!

Posted by Joe on 11/10/11 at 06:46 PM ET

Add a Comment

Please limit embedded image or media size to 575 pixels wide.

Add your own avatar by joining Kukla's Korner, or logging in and uploading one in your member control panel.

Captchas bug you? Join KK or log in and you won't have to bother.


Notify me of follow-up comments?


Most Recent Blog Posts

About Kukla's Korner Hockey

Paul Kukla founded Kukla’s Korner in 2005 and the site has since become the must-read site on the ‘net for all the latest happenings around the NHL.

From breaking news to in-depth stories around the league, KK Hockey is updated with fresh stories all day long and will bring you the latest news as quickly as possible.

Email Paul anytime at