User Rating: / 13
PoorBest 

Thursday, 09 February 2012 10:07

Written by Seth Rorabaugh

After Evgeni Malkin used a spinorama to score in a shootout against Canadiens goaltender Carey Price Tuesday, criticism was levied against the move.

If you didn't see it, here you go:

Questions over the move arose from the legality of it to its ethics. Apparently, it wasn't within the blurry boundaries of the "unwritten rules."

This isn't the first time a move like that has been questioned. Last season, Edmonton forward Linus Omark ruffled the feathers of Lightning goaltender Dan Ellis with this fancy display:

After the game, Ellis described the move by saying, "It's embarrassing for him."

Others have derided similar displays of skill as gimmicky or circus acts.

Really? From the same sport which largely tolerates acts like this:

And this:

Which is the circus again?

Full-out brawls are romanticized as some supposedly vital fiber of the sport. Meanwhile, an unusual display of skill is slammed as a full-out blitzkrieg against the honor of the game which allows for pre-meditated assault on a regular basis.

Get some perspective people.

What Malkin and Omark offered was entertainment. And that's what the shootout and to a larger degree, all sports are.

Entertainment.

In 1928, the NHL legalized forward passing in order to make it more entertaining. Critics at the time derided it as a gimmick which would ruin the game. Amazingly, the sport not only survived, it seems to be prospering some 80 years later.

We're willing to bet in 80 years, the NHL will still be around despite Malkin's heinious antics.

(Photo: Claus Andersen/Getty Images)

Comments (8)

Subscribe to this comment's feed

...
written by sean t, February 09, 2012 - 12:00 PM

Ridiculous, but not surprising given the prevailing attitudes of many in the NHL. It also doesn't help much with many people that they are European. I'll bet if a Canadien-born player did something like what Malkin or Omark did, you wouldn't hear a peep about it.

• 
• +10
• 
• 

...
written by Luiz Mello, February 09, 2012 - 12:18 PM

You are spot on as usual, Seth.

I like this sarcasm-ridden post to the Lightning players' reaction to Omark's spinorama last season: http://crownedroyal.com/2010/1...-shootout/

It does well to expose the hypocrisy of the self-appointed guardians of "respect" and "honor" in hockey.

• 
• +4
• 
• 

...
written by Blitzburgh Brian, February 09, 2012 - 12:33 PM

Sean makes a good point: Pierre-Marc Bouchard has made good use of the spin move in the shootout, but no one has ever accused that good ol' French-Canadian boy of ruining hockey.

• 
• +3
• 
• 

...
written by djbst75, February 09, 2012 - 01:33 PM

g a r a g e league that is all!

• 
• +0
• 
• 

...
written by Luiz Mello, February 09, 2012 - 01:46 PM

Double standards regarding Canadian players x European probably plays a part here, but there's also the "I Don't Like It When It's Done to Me, but It's OK When I Do It to Others" factor.

• 
• +3
• 
• 

...
written by yumbrownies, February 09, 2012 - 02:06 PM

Spot on. See also Marty St. Louis for gimmicky shootout moves that go unquestioned.

• 
• +5
• 
• 

...
written by ward, February 09, 2012 - 02:11 PM

In rule 24.2 regarding penalty shots (which applies to shootouts), the rule book says "The puck must be kept in motion towards the opponent’s goal line and once it is shot, the play shall be considered complete." But then it goes on to say "The spin-o-rama type move where the player completes a 360° turn as he approaches the goal, shall be permitted as this involves continuous motion."

Notably absent in that second part, is the bit about the puck moving towards the goal line. I think this is somewhat contradictory, or at least confusing. With Malkin's shot, he essentially stops at the top of the crease, and the puck goes backwards for a bit before going back towards the net. I don't think there would be as much criticism of this particular shot if the spin move happened in the slot farther away from the goalie, and the "whole package", puck and player, essentially kept moving towards the net.

I think the "unwritten" spirit of the rule suggests that at least the player OR the puck must be moving towards the net at all times. But, if neither are, like in this case just towards the end of the move, then it becomes suspect.

Thoughts?

• 
• -1
• 
• 

...
written by EricNaughton, February 09, 2012 - 06:02 PM

Jason Blake, as a member of the Toronto Maple Leafs, scored a spin-o-rama during a shootout at least once, probably more than once. He schooled the goalie and skated back to the bench, looking like scoring that goal was the easiest thing he had ever done. I don't have a problem at all with the spin-o-rama exception to the forward motion rule. It's an awesome move and when a goalie stops it (once very thirty attempts), it's even better! Guys have to stick up for their goalie, even if it means saying something ridiculous. Anyone who criticized Malkin probably sucks at doing the spin-o-rama.

• 
• +1
• 
•