Skip to content

NHL says spin-o-rama will be monitored closely

Oct 7, 2013, 11:02 AM EST

Mason Raymond’s signature spin-o-rama shootout goal on Saturday, and the complaint that went with it, prompted the NHL to clarify the issue Sunday evening on its website.

According to senior league executive Colin Campbell, players who attempt the shootout move are risking a goal being called back if “1) there is interference on the goaltender or 2) the puck stops completely or 3) their motion stops completely and/or reverses.”

Looking at Raymond’s goal, it doesn’t appear that the puck ever stops moving. Still, there’s something that doesn’t seem fair about a player being allowed to jam on the brakes and reverse the puck like that. Which is why the move looked to be going the way of the dodo bird in June; however, there was no support to eliminate it from the NHLPA.

  1. withseidelinn - Oct 7, 2013 at 11:11 AM

    I really don’t see how it’s unfair.

    • peterjohnjoseph - Oct 7, 2013 at 11:41 AM

      Well look at it this way-

      What if a player skated straight up to a goalie and stopped, froze the goalie who is expecting a single move, and then without spinning deeked back and forth before putting the puck in the opposite side on a goalie that assumed the play would be dead when the player stopped, and planned his positioning based on that principle.

      It would look so unfair, and obviously against the rules which state that once forward motion stops, the play is dead. The spin-o-rama (I hate that name.. it sounds like something Vince McMahon would name it.) is essentially that. Your coming to a stop before turning around and placing it where the goalie is not, ie- the opposite of the place that the goalie thought the puck would be when forward motion stopped. When you’re a goalie and have to plan how to cut off angles and play any given shot, while in a shootout you’re not only planning based on positioning, but what the player can do within the rules. When after you’ve already cut off that angle and made the play to the puck, you’re not expecting that you’ll even have to make another move after the player comes to a stop.

      • withseidelinn - Oct 7, 2013 at 12:18 PM

        Based on what you said – it would be unfair. But the goalies know it isn’t an illegal move so they have to be prepared for it.

        I agree it is a little cheap but there shouldn’t be any complaining until it is ruled illegal.

      • dueman - Oct 7, 2013 at 12:59 PM

        I agree with withseidelin, it is a cheap play, especially when it comes to being allowed to snow the goalie as part of the play, but to complain about it for three days on this site is just silly. Until the NHL makes the play illegal, we are going to keep seeing it! Personally, I think they should scrap the shootout altogether and just add an extra 5 minutes of 4 on 4. Let a tie be a tie if that’s how it ends, or at least add the extra time before going to a shoot out so that we see less of them. Seeing the shoot out every other game has zapped any, and all excitement out of them.

  2. tlow97 - Oct 7, 2013 at 11:16 AM

    The moral of this lesson is that shootouts still suck.

  3. spochiefsfan - Oct 7, 2013 at 11:31 AM

    May as well disallow any Datsyukian moves if they’re trying to eliminate creativity and zero in on whether or not the puck kept moving forward.
    We already have the always entertaining shootout to haphazardly decide these close and hard fought games. Why not keep the ‘rama (even though it may seem a bit silly) if we’re to going to keep the skills competition (even though it may seem a bit silly).

  4. terrier92 - Oct 7, 2013 at 11:32 AM

    Not a fan

    Try on Timmy thomas and he will lay u out

    • skr213 - Oct 7, 2013 at 5:15 PM

      Tim Thomas – the guy who allowed 7 goals the other night? That Tim Thomas?

  5. practicedoremi - Oct 7, 2013 at 12:48 PM

    NHL is ever-vigilant to take fun out of hockey. How myopic!

  6. practicedoremi - Oct 7, 2013 at 12:49 PM

    Taking excitement out of hockey. good um… move, dudes.

  7. blackandorangeforlife - Oct 7, 2013 at 4:37 PM

    Didnt the NHL say the words “Forward Movement” last season?….Did they forget about the forward part?

  8. blackandorangeforlife - Oct 7, 2013 at 4:37 PM

    Didn’t the NHL say the words “Forward Movement” last season?….Did they forget about the forward part?

  9. joeyg97 - Oct 7, 2013 at 5:37 PM

    Screw a tie. I’d rather keep the spin a rama. it takes skill to complete the move but also annoying for goalies. But if they eliminate shootouts Corey Crawford wouldn’t be complaining.

  10. matt14gg - Oct 7, 2013 at 6:01 PM

    “Monitored closely”??? What does that even mean? It’s either illegal or it’s not, and by the letter of the rule it’s clearly illegal (the puck clearly reverses). The league wants creativity, fine, but claiming there will be some sort of bogus examination of the finer points of the spin-o-rama is ridiculous.

  11. oldschoolisbetter - Oct 8, 2013 at 7:04 PM

    Eliminating the shootout doesn’t eliminate the excitement from the “game” because the shootout isn’t the game. The shootout is a Bettman-era add-on to a game that was fine without it. There’s nothing wrong with a tie. What was boring was the style of hockey at the time of the introduction of the shootout, and it was the wrong solution for the problem. The trap was the problem. Leave the overtime IN the game, because it involves the whole team, and it’s a team game. Remove the shootout and the hotdogging like this Raymond move that ensues when you add an “individualism” element to a team sport. The fact that a team game is reduced to hockey’s version of a slam dunk contest to decide a winner is a joke.

Featured video

Holiday wish lists for NHL teams
Top 10 NHL Player Searches
  1. B. Bishop (2530)
  2. C. Perry (2108)
  3. B. Elliott (2106)
  4. S. Crosby (2073)
  5. J. Howard (1843)
  1. S. Varlamov (1739)
  2. S. Weiss (1692)
  3. J. Schwartz (1562)
  4. J. Neal (1471)
  5. S. Mason (1456)