Over the summer, there were rumblings the spin-o-rama move in the shootout was going to be outlawed by the NHL.
As it was put on NHL.com back in June:
The NHL’s general managers were hoping to make the spin-o-rama in shootouts illegal for this season, but there was no support at the NHLPA level.
Mike Murphy, the NHL’s Senior Vice President of Hockey Operations, told NHL.com that he isn’t sure if the general managers will review the topic again in the near future.
“I would say it’s put to bed for a few years,” Murphy said.
Tonight the spin-o-rama became the center of attention again in the Ottawa-Toronto game. The Maple Leafs had clawed back from a 4-2 deficit to force overtime and a shootout and the first player to come down on Craig Anderson was Mason Raymond. (By the way, how good was this guy? Could be the steal of September.)
Here’s Raymond’s attempt, which ended up as the difference.
The Senators were upset with the fact they thought Raymond had stopped his motion and that the goal shouldn’t have counted. As it says in the NHL rulebook: “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.”
Raymond was about as close to stopping as you can come without halting your “motion.” But this is a move Raymond pulled so many times with the Canucks that Anderson should have had it in the front of his mind.
There are two schools of thought here. On one hand, it’s entertaining to see the move – though maybe a little less so than it used to be, since it’s happening more and more often. On the other, something about it stinks of a cheap maneuver a goalie can’t fairly defend.
But it would defeat the purpose of the shootout to start legislating against creativity – and especially creativity that works. This is what the league got into when it adopted the skills competition as a way of handing out points in the first place. What’s next, the outlaw of the Kaspars Daugavins move? As long as the shootout exists, there will be some degree of “ick” that comes along with it.
What do you think? Goal or no goal? Fair move or not?