player is allowed to deliberately turn and angle

[wh3171]

DENVER -- Carmelo Anthonys bid for a triumphant return to Denver fell short. Greg Colbrunn Jersey . Anthony missed a contested, 14-foot jumper at the buzzer as the Nuggets hung on for a 97-95 victory over their former star player and his struggling New York Knicks on Friday night. "I didnt get it done, thats it," Anthony said. "My teammates did a great job of getting us in that position, putting us in that position, giving me the chance of tying the game or going for the win. I didnt come through. Ill take that." Ty Lawson scored 22 points for the Nuggets, who sent the Knicks to their eighth consecutive loss. Randy Foye added 17 points and provided the defence on Anthonys last shot, timing his jump so that the All-Star forward had to shoot over his outstretched hand. "At the end of the game, Im trying to win, just like him," Foye said. "I knew he wanted that. You could tell. Hes the All-Star. Hes a leading scorer. Hes supposed to take that shot. I just buckled down. I take pride in my defence." Anthony, who finished with 27 points, starred for the Nuggets for 7 1/2 seasons. He was back in Denver for the second time since he asked for and received a trade to New York in February 2011. Just as he was in his initial return to Denver last March, when a knee injury knocked him out of the game early, the former fan favourite was booed practically every time he touched the ball. The last few minutes were especially rough on Anthony, who also missed a jumper that could have tied it with under 4 minutes left and turned the ball over on a travelling call with just under 3 minutes to go. But Anthony said the reception he got from the crowd didnt affect him. "Hell no, that dont concern me," he said. "Im past those stages." Andrea Bargnani added 22 points for New York. J.R. Smith and Iman Shumpert had 11 apiece. Denver power forward Kenneth Faried left midway through the third quarter to have his bruised right quadriceps treated. Anthony converted a three-point play that pulled the Knicks to 75-67 heading into the fourth. Tim Hardaway Jr. hit his second 3-pointer in the fourth, igniting a 6-0 burst that got the Knicks to 81-78 with 7:32 left. New York fought back to 85-83 on a pair of free throws, but Wilson Chandler, who came to Denver from the Knicks as part of the Anthony trade, drained a 3 to give the Nuggets a five-point lead. The Knicks cut it to 96-93 when Raymond Felton hit a 3 with 31 seconds left. A turnover by Chandler led to a driving layup by Shumpert to get the Knicks within a point. After Lawson made one of two free throws with 19 seconds left, the Knicks got the ball to Anthony, who backed in against Foye and pulled up for a turnaround jumper that Foye managed to get a hand on, leaving the shot well short. "Hes strong. Hes bulldog strong," Lawson said of Foye. "Hes definitely a good post player and we rely on him down the stretch. Ive seen Melo make a lot of tough shots and he played him perfectly, made him shoot over him and put a hand up and Melo didnt really expect it." Lawson had 14 points in the first half, helping the Nuggets take a 51-45 lead. The Nuggets led by as many as 13 points earlier, going in front 42-29 on a driving dunk by J.J. Hickson with 5:37 left in the second. New York closed the gap by putting together an 8-0 run, pulling within five points on Feltons floater in the lane with 3:01 to play in the period. NOTES: Lawson has scored 10 or more points in all 15 of his games. ... Anthony is the only player in the NBA who has led his team in scoring in every game this season. ... The Knicks skid is their longest since also losing eight in a row in February 2010. ... The Nuggets have gone 9-3 since an 0-3 start. Damian Miller Jersey . Therrien would not confirm his lineup for the game, but he did have the same line combinations practicing together for the third straight day which is usually a pretty good indication of what the lineup will be. Eduardo Escobar Jersey . Linemates Ryan Johansen and Boone Jenner each had a goal and an assist in the first period, and Sergei Bobrovsky made 36 saves to lead the Blue Jackets past the Florida Panthers 4-1 on Saturday night. https://www.cheapdiamondbacksjerseys.us/828l-taijuan-walker-jersey-diamondbacks.html . According to TSN Hockey Insider Darren Dreger, the Maple Leafs have trade offers on the table for the 26-year-old, but none have been deemed acceptable by the team.Got a question on rule clarification, comments on rule enforcements or some memorable NHL stories? Kerry wants to answer your emails at cmonref@tsn.ca. Dear Mr. Fraser, In the Islanders/Blues game on Saturday, the Isles had the apparent game-winning goal overturned in overtime because of a distinct kicking motion by Thomas Vanek. This was the explanation the referee received from Toronto after the goal was reviewed. Ive watched the play over and over, I cant see any kicking motion, let alone a distinct one. The Isles broadcast team thought it was a good goal. They even reported the Blues broadcast team called it a good goal. The Blues goalie (Jaroslav Halak) skated toward the gate leading to the visitors locker room (clearly, he must have figured it was a good goal). The NHL uses the word "distinct" to describe the words "kicking motion." According to the dictionary, "distinct" means readily distinguishable by the senses. I would imagine that if the NHL added "distinct" they meant that the motion could not be interpreted as anything other than a kicking motion. What does a "distinct kicking motion" look like from a referees perspective? As a fan, I would assume the knee would have to bend a bit or the thigh would have to move somewhat, especially if we are talking about a motion being "distinct." I know the NHL can overturn referees calls if there is conclusive evidence, but what does mean if the video doesnt seem to support the explanation. Does the NHL mean "distinct kicking motion" in a figurative or a literal way? Is there an explanation for "distinct" that the NHL uses that fans and internet analysts are not aware of? How does the NHL determine conclusive evidence to overturn a call, especially when most people watching assumed the goal was a good one? The refs didnt spend a long time at the timekeepers station, so the evidence should have been distinct to everyone watching, which is wasnt according to how many people thought the goal should have stood. The NHL had to see something that they consider "distinct," but that the rest of people watching may not have considered (this is my speculation). Its that "something" that has prompted my email inquiry to you. Was this simply a bad call by the guys in Toronto (a frustrating bad call in my personal opinion)? I appreciate you taking the time to read this email. I enjoy reading your column on TSN.ca. Thank you,Michael Bonet Michael: Thank you for your detailed question along with the logical (and expert) analysis you provided relative to the goal Thomas Vanek scored in overtime. To the referees eye, mind and perspective Thomas Vanek did NOT use a "distinct kicking motion" to propel the puck past Blues goalie Jaroslav Halak and score the game-winning goal in overtime. This was another example of an "officiating decisiion" made correctly on the ice that was overturned by "non-officiating personnel" that staff the Situation Room on a nightly basis. Alex Young Jersey. (NFL and MLB employ and empower referees/umpires to make final video review decisions). The guidelines and definition in determining a "distinct kicking motion" must have changed drastically, at least concerning Situation Room criteria employed, from when the kicking puck rule was first explained to my colleagues and I during a training camp meeting the season the rule was implemented. Otherwise Thomas Vaneks goal and the one scored by Brendan Gallagher of the Habs against Martin Brodeur last week (both of which were deemed legal by the referee in great position on the ice) would not have been overturned and disallowed through the video review process. The definition in rule 38.4 (iv) remains the same as when it was explained to us in that training camp meeting by Hockey Ops that still control the Situation Room. "A DISTINCT KICKING MOTION is one which, with a pendulum motion, the player propels the puck with his skate into the net. If the Video Goal Judge determines that it was put into the net by an attacking player using a distinct kicking motion, it must be ruled NO GOAL." As you correctly pointed out, Michael, the former NHL players working as analysts on both the NY Islanders and St. Louis Blues broadcast teams were convinced that Vaneks goal should count. They went so far as to say that Vanek wouldnt have known where the puck was as he rotated his body position away from Halak at the top of the goal crease and was then shoved from behind by Alexander Steen of the Blues. A referees perspective would clearly indicate that the bump from behind by Steen changed Vaneks rotation to a forward motion toward the net and caused the puck to be deflected off Vaneks skate and into the net. (Rule 49.2 - A puck that deflects into the net off an attacking players skate who does not use a distinct kicking motion is a legitimate goal. A puck that is directed into the net by an attacking plays skate shall be a legitimate goal as long as no distinct kicking motion is evident). We can envision various legal plays when a player is allowed to deliberately turn and angle his skate to direct a puck into the net or even makes a natural sliding stop at the crease in order to contact the puck causing it to enter the goal. Unless there has been some change in the definition and criteria of a "distinct kicking motion" it makes no sense that Thomas Vaneks goal would be disallowed through a video review decision. If there has been a "distinct" change in the criteria that the Situation Room employs in rendering their exclusive decisions, perhaps it is time they advise the rest of the hockey world! Until that takes place, Michael, this decision will be viewed by most as "simply a bad call by the guys in Toronto!" ' ' '