For yet another time this season, the Calgary Flames were involved in loose interpretations of the rule book, especially around Rule 79: The Hand Pass.
The Flames had a goal count against them earlier against Nashville where a hand pass by Filip Forsberg was challenged and went unsuccessful.
Now, in their latest game versus the Toronto Maple Leafs, Connor Zary‘s game-tying goal was reviewed and disallowed by merit of a missed hand pass that occurred earlier in the play.
The rule in itself is open to subjectivity. Quite literally written clear as day in the rulebook, the word “opinion” is a part of the rule, showing just how messed up this rule actually is and how unlucky Calgary’s been concerning the hand pass.
The NHL’s hand pass rule
Directly from the 2023–24 NHL Rule Book, this is what it says:
Rule 79 – Hand Pass
79.1 Hand Pass – A player shall be permitted to stop or “bat” a puck in the
air with his open hand, or push it along the ice with his hand, and the
play shall not be stopped unless, in the opinion of the on-ice officials,
he has directed the puck to a teammate, or has allowed his team to
gain an advantage, and subsequently possession and control of the
puck is obtained by a player of the offending team, either directly or
deflected off any player or official.
For violations related to “closing his hand on the puck”, refer to
Rule 67 – Handling Puck.
79.2 Defending Zone – Play will not be stopped for any hand pass by
players in their own defending zone. The location of the puck when
contacted by either the player making the hand pass or the player
receiving the hand pass shall determine the zone it is in.
79.3 Face-Off Location – When a hand pass violation has occurred, the
ensuing face-off shall take place at the nearest face-off spot in the
zone where the offense occurred, unless the offending team gains a
territorial advantage, then the face-off shall be at the nearest face-off
spot in the zone where the stoppage of play occurred, unless
otherwise covered in the rules. When a hand pass violation occurs by
a team in their attacking zone, the ensuing face-off shall be conducted
at one of the face-off spots outside the defending team’s blue line in
the neutral zone.
The play was about Rule 79.1 in particular. As mentioned, the word “opinion” is a part of the rule. Make of that what you will.
So, the review in question revolves around Blake Coleman allegedly violating Rule 79 with the following play:
After a timeout and lengthy review, the goal was called back as that play was deemed a hand pass. I personally disagree with the rule and the outcome here. I disagree with the rule because rules shouldn’t be subject to opinions for something as measurable as a hand pass. I disagree with the outcome cause even in the language of the rule, at no point was the puck stopped or batted by Coleman. If that deflection off of Coleman is considered a “bat” then I’m certain I can “bat” a 100% average in the MLB.
Time to revisit the rules
The NHL and controversial goals and no-goals go together like bread and butter. However, it’s high time the league stops making controversial goals and no-goals their bread and butter.
These types of rules and these types of challenges make for a pretty poor product and teams are going to get frustrated with these outcomes. It’ll do more harm than good in the long run.
