|
| 18 Jun 2016 11:21 PM |
Nor can I just take an L. In the ARZ-DAL game today Carlosaq scored a lag goal. (Heard he's well known for his lag spikes even if they look like lag switches) Tak, I was told by several staff who didn't see the play that since lag does not affect the goalie it's a gg.
But thats wrong. Normally it would not affect the goalie (still affects defense and is nonsense to call it a gg honestly) as the goalie would be able to react to save it. BUT the shot caused it to go into the goalie's chest, and as he was lagging the goaltender had less time to react, and carlos had more time to react to the rebound as he was lagging. Therefore it DID affect the goalie's ability to react and should be called a ng.
As I said I am aware that normally a lag goal is a good goal, but this is no normal lag goal and the replay clearly shows that it has the effect of the goalie being unable to react as he would have been able to if he did not lag.
So if this is a good goal I want a good reason on how the lag does not affect the goaltender when it is clearly shown to.
Replay of it: ht tp s: // m. yo ut ub e. co m/ wa tc h? v= Cw d3 ki UM t Ac |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
Era_Gamer
|
  |
| Joined: 24 Feb 2016 |
| Total Posts: 549 |
|
|
| 18 Jun 2016 11:32 PM |
this makes me wanna join hhcl
#code game.Players["Era_Gamer"]:remove() |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 19 Jun 2016 12:00 AM |
| highkey arizona getting robbed, never give up |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
| |
|
k0nq
|
  |
| Joined: 27 Oct 2012 |
| Total Posts: 64 |
|
| |
|
eelee345
|
  |
| Joined: 19 Mar 2012 |
| Total Posts: 6255 |
|
|
| 19 Jun 2016 03:20 PM |
| gg under current rules, lag was during the original save, goalie was fine on the rebound. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 19 Jun 2016 03:29 PM |
| Guess I might as well ask how it does not affect the goalie when it slashes his reaction time because of the puck being laggy and hitting him late so that the player could shoot it into the net with no reaction for a longer period of time. Am I missing something? pls explain |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 19 Jun 2016 03:32 PM |
| he didn't freeze the goalie at all, that's normal reaciton time to a rebound. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 19 Jun 2016 03:33 PM |
| Since I'm an idiot I pgrased it wrong. I meant to say it slashe the shooter's reaction time and invreased the Goalie's. My bad. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
eelee345
|
  |
| Joined: 19 Mar 2012 |
| Total Posts: 6255 |
|
|
| 19 Jun 2016 03:35 PM |
The lag, in effect, just delayed the shot and thus delayed the goalie's ORIGINAL reaction. Once he reacted originally, the goalie would have acted just the same as he would have normally, and furthermore the lag had gone down significantly, also allowing the goalie to react normally to the rebound.
|
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 19 Jun 2016 03:57 PM |
But since the shot was delayed the goalie did not get to react to the rebound as fast as he would have if the shot had not lagged. If the shot had not lagged it would have been in his pads, bounced out and he would have blocked the shot. The goalie would have also poke checked the shot away if the shot had not lagged. I completely disagree that it did not affect the goalie, it has rather clear effects imo.
When you watch him do his circle shot, the puck lags, and since it hits him late, carlos is able to push up and get the puck for the rebound. If you won't say it affected the goalie, it still affected that, and I sincerely must ask that if you won't say the goalie is affected (even though he was) that him lagging affected the play and was the only reason it was a goal and should be a ng. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
eelee345
|
  |
| Joined: 19 Mar 2012 |
| Total Posts: 6255 |
|
|
| 19 Jun 2016 04:00 PM |
| A shot from that distance would cause the same reaction from the goalie. He still reacted normally to the shot. He reacted normally to the rebound. The lag only caused a delay, not a complete change in his movements. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 19 Jun 2016 04:03 PM |
| tunder was so pissed about this but the final call is what it is going to have to be so let's move on Arizona |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 19 Jun 2016 04:04 PM |
| You make solid points, but that is 100% a good goal. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
eelee345
|
  |
| Joined: 19 Mar 2012 |
| Total Posts: 6255 |
|
|
| 19 Jun 2016 04:04 PM |
| I do sympathize, that goal is bs but is not strictly against the current rules- it is a gg but is frowned upon. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 19 Jun 2016 04:05 PM |
| Sorry for the bs loss, but I guess that's how virtual hockey is. Just move on and get ready for the next game. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
alexv123
|
  |
| Joined: 04 Apr 2009 |
| Total Posts: 336 |
|
| |
|
|
| 19 Jun 2016 04:24 PM |
| Eelee but if it caused a delay certainly it affected the goalie? |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
eelee345
|
  |
| Joined: 19 Mar 2012 |
| Total Posts: 6255 |
|
|
| 19 Jun 2016 04:31 PM |
| But the shot also delayed, hence the delay in reaction was the delay to the shot. So he acted normally, just the play happened later. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 19 Jun 2016 04:34 PM |
| So everything was delayed except carlos, which is why he scored the rebound. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
eelee345
|
  |
| Joined: 19 Mar 2012 |
| Total Posts: 6255 |
|
|
| 19 Jun 2016 04:37 PM |
| Carlos was not delayed on the ORIGINAL shot, but had to react the same on the rebound as any other non-laggy HHCLer would've. His lag actually would NOT have helped him, since he would likely have been FARTHER than any other HHCLer. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 19 Jun 2016 04:52 PM |
| tak... I disagree on that fact that he would be farther away... but tak. I'll stop now. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
oomtm450
|
  |
| Joined: 09 Mar 2010 |
| Total Posts: 24 |
|
|
| 20 Jun 2016 10:41 AM |
| This isn't a good example of a lag goal in HHCL but it is true that those goals are pretty annoying and with the new rule, it is pretty stupid. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|