Illigal movements/Obstruction etc

The key phrase is attempting to stop or advance the puck.

In the first video it is questionable whether the player attempted to stop the puck with their body (i.e moved their body into the line of the flick) or was simply flicked into and could not get out of the way.

If you take the first interpretation it is a foul, if it was the second as a ref I would of allowed play to continue.

PS. sven the videos are great, but you have kind of bombarded us in this thread and it is hard to discuss the ins and outs of all the videos. Maybe a slow release of videos over time and focussing on one reffing decision at a time. Seperating the decisions in different threads could also be a good idea.

Maybe another idea
Everybody place there illigal moves/obstructions etc in this topic and iff somebody want to discuss one off those moves/obstructions etc just copy that one out off here and start a discussion about that one.

I think not all the moves and obstructions give an discussion.
But its good to show them out here. (like that elbow. I now exact what happend before and after the elbow. I was the reff that game)

I will start a discussion about that soon. I really want to now how the others will have reacted.

__________________
Try to understand. "By winning you can losses more then by loosing.

sven i recently sat a ref's course (although i am not completing my ref's cert, that would mean i have to ref!) - and one of the points bought up was stopping the puck with your body, and the way Simon described it - movie 1 would not be illegal.

if the player without possession does not move their body in an attempt to stop the puck and only attempts to play at the puck with their stick (ie lifting up your chest to allow the puck to bounce off it) - then it is not deemed as illegal and is the attacking (player who flicked) players fault for flicking it into their body and could be deemed as a dangerous flick depending on the severity.

Its always easy to see it from behind the computer screen.
In a game you only have seen something 1 time in a split second.
And on that you must made a decision “legal or illegal”

So there will be reffs that call this illegal and there will be reffs that call it legal.
Something we can but the reff in the water not is look more times to the movie.




Photo 1: When the player is doing the flick. On the same moment the other player moves his stick and hand upwards. On this photo you can see that the gloves is still on the bottom. Like the most of his arm.

Photo 2: On photo 2 you see that the puck already left the stick from the player that made the flick and the player that want to stop the puck lift his glove and stick to intercept the puck. (only the elbow is still on the bottom from the pool.

Photo 3: You can see he catch the puck with his inside hand/wrist. And the arm has left complete the bottom of the pool.

__________________
Try to understand. "By winning you can losses more then by loosing.

like you say sven, in the game the refs wouldn't have the time to go back and freeze frame the video; and after watching the video once even with the poor quality i would have called that play on

the player did not move his arm in a manner to get in the way of the puck, he moved his stick and bat - it was a poor attacking flick

When a flick hits you in the torso it should be play on, since there is no way you can move your torso quickly enough to deliberately put it in the way of a flick hence you are not playing at the puck. By the same token its not possible to move your torso out of the way of a flick if you wanted to, and any interpretation where you could automatically draw a foul by flicking into an opponents body any time you liked would be stupid and unbalanced in favour of the team with the puck.

On the other hand, it is possible to move your arms/legs out of the way of a flick and hence catching the puck on the hand/arm/leg/fin should result in a foul, even if they claim their hand/arm/leg/fin was perfectly stationary (which would be a bollocks claim anyway). The very upper arm and leg is a bit of a grey area (since its attached to the more or less immobile torso).

Oh Nicky, you haven't seen me belly dance have you?

__________________
Just in case you weren't sure, it's official -- CMAS sucks.
Oh yeah, and now they're broke.

Do you have a movie from it? then we can see if its legal to use it during a game....(wink)

Another one.
(yes i'm a bad boy,,, it me...yesterday 7-8-2007)
2 times illigal gloving...

__________________
Try to understand. "By winning you can losses more then by loosing.

More videos of faults in French web:

Faults1
Faults2

Nice movies.
Can i sent it to the theather that gives the reff education in the netherlands.

__________________
Try to understand. "By winning you can losses more then by loosing.