One of the oddest hockey rulings I've seen

[clem21]

I have watched and played in hundreds (probably thousand[s] if you add them all) of hockey games. I have never seen what I saw tonight.

The NY Rangers were getting thoroughly outplayed by the LA Kings in a 1-1 game but they were on a power play. In the middle of a ho-hum advantage, the ref signaled another penalty.

The offense in question was a LA defenseman shooting a broken stick that was on the ice at Michael Roszival, a NY player, who had the puck.

I was expecting a 2:00 interference call but no, apparently this obscure rule awards a penalty shot to the victimized team!

So Roszival, a defenseman (!) makes a couple of nifty moves and buries the penalty shot to give the Rangers the lead. OK. It's weird but I'll take it.

Have any of you old people ( ) seen anything like this before?

[andrewjackson]

I have watched and played in hundreds (probably thousand[s] if you add them all) of hockey games. I have never seen what I saw tonight.

The NY Rangers were getting thoroughly outplayed by the LA Kings in a 1-1 game but they were on a power play. In the middle of a ho-hum advantage, the ref signaled another penalty.

The offense in question was a LA defenseman shooting a broken stick that was on the ice at Michael Roszival, a NY player, who had the puck.

I was expecting a 2:00 interference call but no, apparently this obscure rule awards a penalty shot to the victimized team!

So Roszival, a defenseman (!) makes a couple of nifty moves and buries the penalty shot to give the Rangers the lead. OK. It's weird but I'll take it.

Have any of you old people ( ) seen anything like this before?

I have not seen this called before that I can remember but I was vaguely aware that this rule exists. I did not know that it was the player interfered with that had to take the penalty shot.

NHL rule 53.6:

53.6 Penalty Shot - When any member of the defending team, including
the Coach or any non-playing person, throws or shoots any part of a
stick or any other object or piece of equipment at the puck or puck
carrier in his defending zone, preventing a reasonable shot or pass,
the Referee shall allow the play to be completed and if a goal is not
scored, a penalty shot shall be awarded to the non-offending team.
This shot shall be taken by the player designated by the Referee as
the player fouled.
If the officials are unable to determine the person against whom
the offense was made, the non-offending team, through the Captain,
shall designate a player on the ice at the time the offense was
committed to take the shot.

[kayrharris]

The flurry of responses here tells me how many people actually watch hockey.

[silvercamaro]

The flurry of responses here tells me how many people actually watch hockey.

I thought it meant that nobody here was an old person.

[Ice Skaping Queen]

The flurry of responses here tells me how many people actually watch hockey.

Who wants to watch big lunkheads out on the ice when they can watch meeeeeeeee!!!!!!!

Come on Kay, I'll show you how to do a triple klutz.... er, lutz.....

[minimetoo26]

The flurry of responses here tells me how many people actually watch hockey.

My husband hates the Rangers, and the Islanders are keeping the basement occupied this season, so we didn't shell out for the NHL Package on cable this year.

[BigDrawMan]

i have seen a player unintentionally throw his stick at a player on a breakaway

i also saw a player throw his stick from the blueline at a puck headed for an empty net at the end of a game
the puck went in, so no penalty shot at the empty net

[clem21]

i have seen a player unintentionally throw his stick at a player on a breakaway

i also saw a player throw his stick from the blueline at a puck headed for an empty net at the end of a game
the puck went in, so no penalty shot at the empty net

No such penalty shot would be awarded anyway. In a case where a penalty shot would be awarded, when there's an empty net a goal is automaically given.

[mcd1400de]

An even odder incident occurred near the end of a Flyers-Lightning game just a couple weeks ago.

With less than 20 seconds left in regulation of a tie game, Tampa forward Ryan Malone went in on a breakaway. Suddenly, a glove went sailing past Malone as he missed his shot -- Flyer Scottie Hartnell had thrown it after being beaten on the break! (He'd already lost his stick earlier in the shift.)

Even though the glove apparently didn't affect the breakaway, Malone was still awarded the penalty shot. Fortunately for Hartnell, goalie Martin Biron made the save on the penalty as well, and the Flyers went on to win the game in OT.

[AlphaDummy]

Have any of you old people ( ) seen anything like this before?

Harrumph.

Can't say that I have. Of course, most of the hockey I have seen has taken place at the youth or high school level, and I have seen something like three penalty shots assessed in the dozen or so years that I have been working games. All of these were assessed on the "fouled from behind on a breakaway" premise, and one of them was on a penalty called on <tadaa!> my son.

I am not sure if this rule is in place for youth/HS levels (although it does make sense); I will have to ask a zebra next time I work a game.