No, rule 79.1 shows that the refs got it wrong, completely and utterly. That's not a cover up.

Nobody changed anything, the rule proves that the refs were wrong or "missed" the call.

Rule 79 – Hand Pass

79.1 Hand Pass - A player shall be permitted to stop or “bat” a puck in the
air with his open hand, or push it along the ice with his hand, and the
play shall not be stopped unless, in the opinion of the on-ice officials,
he has directed the puck to a teammate, or has allowed his team to
gain an advantage, and subsequently possession and control of the
puck is obtained by a player of the offending team, either directly or
deflected off any player or official.
A player shall be permitted to catch the puck out of the air nbut
must immediately place it or knock it down to the ice. If he catches it
and skates with it, either to avoid a check or to gain a territorial
advantage over his opponent, a minor penalty shall be assessed for
“closing his hand on the puck” under Rule 67 – Handling Puck.

79.2 Defending Zone - Play will not be stopped for any hand pass by
players in their own defending zone. The location of the puck when
contacted by either the player making the hand pass or the player
receiving the hand pass shall determine the zone it is in.

79.3 Face-Off Location – When a hand pass violation has occurred, the
ensuing face-off shall take place at the nearest face-off spot in the
zone where the offense occurred, unless the offending team gains a
territorial advantage, then the face-off shall be at the nearest face-off
spot in the zone where the stoppage of play occurred, unless
otherwise covered in the rules. When a hand pass violation occurs by
a team in their attacking zone, the ensuing face-off shall be conducted
at one of the face-off spots outside the defending team’s blue line in
the neutral zone.

http://www.nhl.com/nhl/en/v3/ext/rules/2018-2019-NHL-rulebook.pdf

What are you babbling about? Learn the rules.

From the referee's vantage point, it may have hit a blues defender before Nyqvist possessed the puck. It's easy to see it slowed down on replay. It's harder to see it in real time when you are on the ice and do not have a good look at it.

http://www.nhl.com/ice/page.htm?id=26478

Read that link and tell me nobody changed anything.

http://www.nhl.com/ice/page.htm?id=26478

It's a GIANT conspiracy...the refs don't want St. Louis to win!!!! LMAO

Follow your link, then click on the "(see Rule 79 – Hand Pass)" link in the first paragraph. That will take you to the official rule book - look up 79.1 in the official rule book.

And the rule book clearly contradicts itself with a lack of consistency. Either way, did the puck touch Bouwmeester first? He clearly had the advantage to the puck regardless.

Wait, so what's the argument for why it should have counted?

Nice strawman. Excellent way to avoid reality.

I'd say because it went into the net, completely crossing the goal line.

I'm not avoiding reality; SJ won THAT'S the reality. The rulebook clearly contradicts itself as shown in the link. There was no deliberate attempt to pass to a teammate...end of story.

Do you have something against the blues? I seriously ask. That was a completely blown call. It happens. I’m not going with the theory that the league is rigged. But anyone who has ever laced skates takes one look at that and cringes at the absurdity of the missed call. Both in the letter and spirit of the rule, that is a hand pass and it is not even arguable.

There was not a deliberate attempt to pass it, Nyquist was knocking it down in front of himself and tried to play the puck. It ended up at Bouwmeester's skates and he played the puck first. Nyquist, who ended up with the puck, was behind the net when the puck was batted down by TM. That is impossible to say it was a hand pass to Nyquist. The refs made the call and aren't going to reverse a game winning goal based on that.

Nothing against the Blues and no dog in the fight. As I've said a million times here, its a crappy way to win and crappy way to lose. Bottom line, Bouwmeester played the puck, Nyquist was behind the net at the time. Wasn't a blown call easily could have gone either way. The rulebook states "deliberately to a teammate" it's clear that wasn't the case at which point you look at attempt and NOBODY can say TM was deliberately passing it to Nyquist as he was behind the net and NOBODY can argue Bouwmeester played it first. Anyone who has ever laced up skates before realizes this is hockey...it's not perfect.

You swat the puck and your team is the first to touch it (and it’s not in your defensive zone) the play is dead. Pure and simple. Refs should be in a position to see that puck being swatted or the linesmen atleast. That is a completely blown call. There is no other way to look at it. It does not have to be an intentional hand pass. There is no grey area.

The rules state that it has to be hand passed "deliberately to a teammate" which 100% clearly that wasn't. Nyquist swatted it down right in front of him and tried to play it as well as Bouwmeester. It's hard to tell whether it touched Nyquist's stick or Bouwmeester's leg/skate....if it did, it's clearly not a pass but again what is clear is both tried to play the puck so the there was nothing deliberate and the intent to handpass it was not there.

That said, because it's hard to tell, nobody should say it was 100% one way or the other and as I've been saying all along the call would have been controversial either way it went....hence, that's hockey.

No the rules do not state that and it’s even been quoted and posted right here, he swatted the puck directly into the slot.

It did not touch any blues player I watched the replay. That’s plain to see. Even if it did that is still a hand pass by rule. 100% hand pass Absolutely no grey area. I do have a horse in the race as I’m cheering for jumbo joe to get his cup but that was a completely blown call by the official.

I don't agree with you, and the rules are stated right here in this thread and if you read the entire thread, you can see the rules actually contradict themselves somewhat and aren't clear either.

Rule 67.1 says it has to be a deliberate action.
67.1 Handling Puck - A player shall be permitted to stop or “bat” a puck in the air with his open hand, or push it along the ice with his hand, and the play shall not be stopped unless, in the opinion of the Referee, he has deliberately directed the puck to a teammate in any zone other than the defending zone, in which case the play shall be stopped and a face-off conducted (see Rule 79 – Hand Pass). Play will not be stopped for any hand pass by players in their own defending zone.

I think it's obvious he batted it down right in front of himself, and it took a weird bounce that happened to end up on nyquist's stick but there was no question, Buewmeester had the best position on the puck not Nyquist who was behind the net at the time Timo batted the puck down thus, right there, shows it wasn't a deliberate hand pass to Nyquist. Furthmore, to add additional gray to the debate, it wasn't his hand it was actually his arm/wrist and the rule states "hand".

You and I nor anyone on this board should stop pretending it was 100% clear that it was a blown call. It wasn't 100% clear either way it's that simple which is why everyone in the hockey world is debating it last night and today. Even the professional analysts, who like us have the luxury of a replay which the refs did not, are split on was it or wasn't it.

Lol half ruling it again, play hockey, that’s all I’ve got to say. Beer hockey, that goal is waived off lol.

I’m not going to argue the rule book you’re half quoting. Anyone who plays hockey and actually knows the rules without having to look them up knows that’s a blown call.

67.1 and 79 contradict one another thus the definition needs to be clear and will get fixed by the NHL. Furthermore, the definition of hand needs to be expanded as clearly Timo didn't use his hand. Third, Bouwmeester had the puck at his skates not a Sharks player and the player that got the puck, Nyquist, was behind the net and Timo at the time Timo knocked the puck down to the feet of himself and Bouwmeester.

This isn't beer hockey and this isn't a normal game, it's the playoffs. Rule 67.1 and 79 need to match up first and foremost which they don't and secondly, all goals in the playoffs...especially game winning goals, need to be reviewable. I've played at at a very competitive level and some of these guys are still in the show, I can tell you with 100% certainty, the rule isn't clear and is a crappy way to both win or lose. If it was called the other way, there would be as much a case to say it was a bad call since there was no deliberate pass made. As someone who's played at a very high level, that's hockey is all one can say. Beer league guys can say it's a conspiracy or blown call but pros are saying it's obviously questionable needs to be addressed but that's hockey, time to move on.

He's lying (surprise!). He's a Hawks fan, which means he hates the Blues to the core (which is fine). So of course, he won't admit the obvious, and will quote the wrong rule to make his ridiculous case (how he imagines with such certainty that Meier wasn't deliberately making a hand pass is apparently not for us to know). The call should be a no-brainer, which one would think falls right in his wheelhouse. And yet, because Mr. "high level" is a Hawks fan and it's the Blues, he won't accept reality.


"79.1Hand Pass - A player shall be permitted to stop or “bat” a puck in the air with his open hand, or push it along the ice with his hand, and the play shall not be stopped unless, in the opinion of the on-ice officials, he has directed the puck to a teammate, or has allowed his team to gain an advantage, and subsequently possession and control of the puck is obtained by a player of the offending team, either directly or deflected off any player or official."

But there was a hand pass/

No doubt, but the question was what is the argument for why it was a goal. That was my answer even though the whole play was called incorrectly.