Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity
On Twitter: kcarrera and PostSports  |  Facebook  |  E-mail alerts: Sports and Redskins  |  RSS

Ovechkin's 'Crazy' Goal

Just when you think you've see it all, Alex Ovechkin does this:

Ovechkin on the goal: "It was a pretty cool goal. I just made some moves. I was tied and I just fell and shoot. You always want to do some crazy things. It was a great goal and I'm happy it happened to me."

By Tarik El-Bashir  |  December 26, 2008; 10:29 PM ET
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Tonight's Lineup
Next: Caps 3, Sabres 2


Posted by: yrb1 | December 26, 2008 10:34 PM | Report abuse

we are good but not number 1 yet. Ovechkin for MVP is the only certain thing right now

Posted by: ergoroc | December 26, 2008 10:37 PM | Report abuse

Simply sublime!

Posted by: Terptwin | December 26, 2008 10:43 PM | Report abuse

crosby dreams of scoring like that...ovie is absurd!!

Posted by: capsfan37 | December 26, 2008 10:48 PM | Report abuse

@dcsportsfan1 re: Flu shots (from 3 posts back). The flu shot is a hit-or-miss thing. The people who develop the vaccine have to guess what strain of flu will hit and develop a vaccination to get it. That doesn't always work, and for last year they guessed wrong. The flu shot isn't like a shot for polio; it's trying to make sure you get the right strain of flu almost a year in advance, and so about 40% of the time, it does nothing. So the guys could well HAVE had a flu shot... and still wound up with the flu.

THAT GOAL was wild, and the crowd went absolutely insane over it. What a great game! We played hard, hit hard (28 hits to 17), got more takeaways (21-4), outshot them 34-24, and Theodore's SV% was .916 for the game. Yes, we gave them the puck more than they gave it to us (20-10), but both teams won 26 faceoffs, and WE won the day!

Good to see Helmer get the #1 star of the game. Two assists, and he totally deserved it.

Gotta hit BWI at oh-dark-hundred tomorrow, so I'm for bed. Night, all! GOOD GAME!

Posted by: irockthered | December 26, 2008 10:49 PM | Report abuse

that goal was just beyond sick. No one else could possibly do that!

Posted by: RedBirdie | December 26, 2008 10:49 PM | Report abuse

@anyone with a better angle than I had... Was the goalie interference call on Laich good? The replay didn't show it, and with Certain Referees Who Shall Remain Paul Devorski on the ice, I'm never sure what's called is what happened... :-p

Posted by: irockthered | December 26, 2008 10:52 PM | Report abuse

I'm still on record for trading Theo if possible. He was very solid tonight, although he wasn't tested that much. Neither of the goals were his fault - the first was a misplay by Alzner (isn't the defender supposed to prevent the pass on a 2-on-1? Alzner plyed it like he was the goalie.) and the second was a crazy bounce off a leaping Afinogenov. I will begin to warm to Theo when he steals a win like Johnny did against Boston.

Posted by: tominfl1 | December 26, 2008 10:53 PM | Report abuse

Well boys and girls, I was at the game and that goal unfolded right in front of me. I could not believe my eyes!! It was un-freakin-believable. That guys is amazing.

Posted by: --Boo-- | December 26, 2008 10:55 PM | Report abuse

It looked like goalie interference, but it also looked like the puck got through before the interference occurred.

Nylander has been playing better - skating better. Kozzie's goal was vintage Mike Gartner. Kozzie is really stepping up with Semin out.

Posted by: tominfl1 | December 26, 2008 10:58 PM | Report abuse

One word comes to mind: Poetry

Posted by: jysmith | December 26, 2008 10:59 PM | Report abuse

w00tastic! w00terific!

Posted by: sargeantmofo | December 26, 2008 11:01 PM | Report abuse

Here I am, a full hour and a half after seeing that goal, and my mouth still will not fully close. And it's getting all dry and chalky now.

The tying goal in a four-goal comeback and now this? You've made a grown man cry, twice, in the last three days, so I hope you are pleased with yourself. Is it weird to cry just because of beautiful hockey? I think it must be, but I can't help it.

I am in awe. Mr. Ovechkin, you are RIDICULOUS. That was outrageous. These words I'm trying to find don't do it, or you, any justice at all, but it's as good as I am going to come up with in this state of mind.

Posted by: youaresquishy | December 26, 2008 11:01 PM | Report abuse

Huh ... didn't look like goalie interference from my angle, either - Laich was not in the paint, was he?

youaresquishy (from the previous):
What Tarik said about Alzner being able to stay because Fed is on LTIR makes sense - while a lot of people would like to see Alzner stick around regardless, we just don't have the cap space to keep him up unless others are on LTIR. It is all about $$ - period.

Posted by: --Boo-- | December 26, 2008 11:07 PM | Report abuse

Was at the game also. For what it's worth:

That goal was either #2 or #1B on OV's career highlight reel. Was giving Mrs. 117 a primer on Caps history before the Gartner retirement ceremony Sunday, and when I tell her about marking out for the team occasionally, that's why.

JT played better but didn't seem to be as challenged as he was in the Rangers game. It was nice to see the team play better ahead of him, but we'll see after a few more games.

Clark, although being on the fourth line, seemed to be playing with a little impact, in fact that whole line seemed to. Maybe he's finding his way again...?

Laich call (unless it was made before the rebound) seemed to be #2, since Buffalo incurred a BS hooking call a few seconds afterwards. Not having a decent replay I couldn't tell for sure.

Anyway, nice win, keep it up against Toronto Sunday on a big night.

Posted by: Section117 | December 26, 2008 11:07 PM | Report abuse

"And that why a lot of folks call him the best player in the game."

And that's why you're the biggest hack and worst announcer in the NHL Rick.

Posted by: CapsNut | December 26, 2008 11:07 PM | Report abuse

Whenever I see Devorski working one of our games, I can't forget the fact that he was the ref who failed to call the goalie interference against the Flyers in the 7th game last Spring that was responsible for their first goal. If this was goalie interference, that surely was. And he's supposed to be one of the best refs.

Posted by: cleubsdorf | December 26, 2008 11:07 PM | Report abuse


that's exactly what I thought, and the replay showed that. I think the refs were way too fast in voiding it. They should have at least reviewed it.

Great game, envy all of you that went :)

Posted by: mauree | December 26, 2008 11:14 PM | Report abuse

Devorski is awful. Here's how you know the interference call was wrong. After watching it on the big screen, the refs called a phantom hook against Buffalo just 8 seconds later.

Posted by: ccCapsfan | December 26, 2008 11:15 PM | Report abuse

actually 33 seconds later. Sorry.

Posted by: ccCapsfan | December 26, 2008 11:16 PM | Report abuse

And after seeing the "On the Fly" review on NHLN, it looked like Tallinder tripped Laich(?) up, so I don't know what was going on in those minds.

Posted by: Section117 | December 26, 2008 11:17 PM | Report abuse

I was surrounded by Buffalo fans, and even they stood up and cheered after Ovie's delight!
No argument that he's the greatest player in the world... sorry Cindy, no matter how much the NHL promotes you, you'll never match OV


Posted by: tURBO8 | December 26, 2008 11:21 PM | Report abuse

Yeah, I was shocked that they did not review it. Frankly, it looked like they were both outside of the paint and that there was no contact until after the goal. I don't get it. Anyway, we won - that's all that matters!! :-)

BTW, loved to see NHL on the Fly drooling over our boys!! :-D

Posted by: --Boo-- | December 26, 2008 11:21 PM | Report abuse

BTW, loved to see NHL on the Fly drooling over our boys!! :-D

Posted by: --Boo-- | December 26, 2008 11:21 PM
I thought the "well, he DID score on Lalime" seem like rationalizing a little bit?

Posted by: Section117 | December 26, 2008 11:23 PM | Report abuse

That and blaming the Dman for that fabulous goal rather than giving Ovie ALL the credit, but there was still a lot of drooling ... they never used to get that!! :-)

Posted by: --Boo-- | December 26, 2008 11:27 PM | Report abuse

BTW, given the Sabres record against the Caps (dare I say, they have our number), the beating they gave us the last time that we played and the depleated state of our team, I would have given Miller the night off, too. Guess you can never underestimate the Caps!!

Posted by: --Boo-- | December 26, 2008 11:30 PM | Report abuse

Pity that wasn't Gary Green on the other side of the desk tonight, he would have deserved a donkey punch if he came 'round the VC Sunday.

Gotta say, the view from the 2 seed looks pretty good, hope the boys can keep it up.

Posted by: Section117 | December 26, 2008 11:33 PM | Report abuse


I'm with you on Theodore. For someone with his level of experience and his track-record over the last few years, it's stupid to think that fireworks will go off and he'll suddenly plug the leaks. He wasn't really tested tonight, so this game isn't indicative of anything.

HNIC reported on Saturday that the Caps have been shopping Theodore all over the League, but they can't get rid of him. The quote was, "They're talking to anyone and everyone." His contract is too much money for a mediocre, inconsistent goalie. They also reported that, earlier in the season, Chicago offered up Khabibulin and at least one draft pick, but GMGM sat on it. Finally, Khabibulin started outplaying Huet, and they withdrew the offer.

Posted by: FedsFan | December 26, 2008 11:34 PM | Report abuse

My initial impression was that the interference call was a bad one, but I only saw it live with one replay.

I felt Laich skated toward Lalime, but not in a deliberate attempt to run into him, and just before the contact, he was tripped by a defender, and that trip prevented him from trying to stop short of Lalime, and therefore it should have been considered a goal under the rule re when "a defending player pushes, shoves, OR FOULS an attacking player into the goaltender" (from the language in the 07-08 Rulebook, p. 159, see

As to tominfl1's point-- One might think at first glance that the goal should be allowed if the interference doesn't actually cause the goal. Intuitively that makes sense.

But if the interference occurs before the puck crosses the line, the way I read the rules, it's still no goal, even if the puck is already past the goalie when the interference occurs (i.e. even if the interference doesn't actually cause the goal).

In other words, there doesn't seem to be any actual causation requirement. The 07-08 Rulebook (I don't think this changed this year but I'm not sure) seems to consider the only thing of importance to be whether the goal is "scored" at the time of interference, because it continually uses language like "at the time a goal is scored." And a goal clearly isn't "scored" until the puck crosses the line.

So, you could make a strong argument that, even if the puck did get through before the contact, if the interference occurred prior to the puck actually going into the net, the rules still would call it interference (unless of course there's some other reason it wasn't interference).

There doesn't seem to be any mention of any kind of causation requirement in the Rulebook. I suspect this could be intended to make it easier for the refs to make determinations re interference. It would be a bit difficult, at least in some cases, to determine whether interference truly caused a goal or not. You'd have to be able to know what would've happened if not for the interference, which in some cases is unknowable.

Posted by: youaresquishy | December 26, 2008 11:34 PM | Report abuse

My argument is actually simpler, and same as Boo's: Laich didn't look inside the crease when he "interfered" Lalime.

Posted by: mauree | December 26, 2008 11:41 PM | Report abuse

That goal was simply incredible. The defender was trying hard but was absolutely helpless. There just isn't anybody better than Ovi. Crosby tries, but it's just not happening for him.

Very, very solid and pretty win for us.

@117: I was thinking the same thing on Clark. He was really good tonight. I'm hoping he keeps it up.

As for Theodore - come on, guys. Give credit where credit is due, and let's talk a little reality. We aren't going to be able to trade him. Don't kid yourselves. The roster we've got is the roster we've got, and the best service we can do all of ourselves is to give him a little confidence and give him credit where credit is due. He did good tonight. Real good. I can't knock him for either of those goals.

Posted by: kittypawz | December 26, 2008 11:42 PM | Report abuse

I realize that this interpretation would mean even if the goalie were behind the net, or even if the goalie were 15 feet away from the net, and an attacking player deliberately ran the goalie there at the time a goal was scored, it'd still be disallowed. I believe that is exactly what would happen though, even if the puck had already left the shooter's stick just prior to the interference. (If the puck hadn't already left the shooter's stick prior to the interference, then I think the penalty combined with possession by the offending team precludes it from being a goal just like any other penalty would.) So, yeah, I think the puck needs to go in the net prior to the interference for it to be a goal, even if it's obvious that the interference played no part in the goal being scored.

Posted by: youaresquishy | December 26, 2008 11:45 PM | Report abuse

OK, but how could they discern all of that without a review?

Just picked up the new THN and headline is: "Sidney Crosby is THE FACE of the NHL. Now he needs to find his voice." I suddenly feel a bit queasy ... (BTW, the emphasis was THN's, not mine).

Posted by: --Boo-- | December 26, 2008 11:49 PM | Report abuse

Mauree: The rules don't require the goalie to be inside the crease though.

Rule 69.1, in relevant part, says it's interference even where "an
attacking player initiates intentional or deliberate contact with a
goalkeeper, inside or outside of his goal crease." That's according to the 07-08 Rulebook at, p. 93.

It's just that when the goalie is inside the crease, you don't necessarily have to actually deliberately or intentionally contact the goalie for it to be interference. If the goalie is outside the crease, it's interference if (a) the attacking player deliberately or intentionally initiates contact with the goalie, and (b) no defending player pushes, shoves, or fouls the attacking player so as to cause him to contact the goalie (so long as the attacking player makes a reasonable attempt to avoid the contact).

I still think it wasn't interference because I thought the Buffalo defender, just prior to the contact between Laich and the goalie, tripped Laich, and Laich had no opportunity after that to try to avoid the contact.

Posted by: youaresquishy | December 26, 2008 11:51 PM | Report abuse

Okay, so in your opinion, who of our callups has earned the right to stay, do you think? I think Sloan, Alzner, and Collins all have. They've all had rough patches and bad games, but that happens. Our D has looked better to me since the blueline became half Bears, and I'm hoping that our guys coming off IR are looking out below because they're being challenged.

Posted by: kittypawz | December 26, 2008 11:53 PM | Report abuse

Boo: Rule 69.1 states: "The rule will be enforced exclusively in accordance with the on-ice
judgement of the Referee(s), and not by means of video replay or

That's according to the 07-08 Rulebook though. I wish they'd post the current rules.

I'd like to see a replay. I'm not sure exactly what I saw really. Maybe the ref was thinking Laich would've run into the goalie even if he hadn't been tripped at the last second. I can't find either a replay or a current Rulebook.

Posted by: youaresquishy | December 26, 2008 11:54 PM | Report abuse

The roster we've got is the roster we've got, and the best service we can do all of ourselves is to give him a little confidence and give him credit where credit is due.

Posted by: kittypawz | December 26, 2008 11:42 PM
Re: the latter, let's not give JT the keys to the city quite yet, 5 periods of hockey does not a goaltender make. Indulge me for a second:

Of the next 7 games, 5 are at home (two are against NYR and PHI). Of the 2 road games, one's at BUF, the other's at MON. Say he gets the call for 5 of those. He doesn't get at least 8 points, then perhaps the search for another proven vet, or the dreaded three goalie system, should be a serious look (the following 7 include 2 BOS games, a road game at PIT and a home game with DET).

Anyway, just thinking out loud. Besides, the roster freeze ends midnight tomorrow, so with Schultz coming back (and Poti/Green following next week maybe), some hard choices might be coming.

Posted by: Section117 | December 26, 2008 11:57 PM | Report abuse

I'd even settle for 7 points in his next 5 starts also.

Oh, and with Schultz coming back, I'd guess that Collins or Helmer might go down because their close(ish) to Schultz' cap hit, but who the frak knows.

Posted by: Section117 | December 27, 2008 12:04 AM | Report abuse

Argh! Lost a post ... do-over:

I agree that Jose had a decent game, but one good game does not impress me. Once he has a series of good games, steals a few games, maintains a winning record or does something else to prove that he is a #1 keeper, THEN I will jump back in his camp. Until then he remains on Booprobation.

Reading the Crosby article - it get's worse. After saying he is on top of the people of power list for the second year since he is still the face of the NHL, it goes on to say:

"But it's simply not enough that everyone in hockey has anointed Crosby the undisputed king of the coolest game on ice. It's time for Crosby to start wearing the crown. It's time for Crosby to act like a king. ... A king wouldn't have shrugged off (Semin's comments like Crosby did). ... Don't just wear the crown, assume the throne, like Gretzky."


Posted by: --Boo-- | December 27, 2008 12:07 AM | Report abuse

Ideally, I think I'd like a defense of Green, Schultz, Poti, Alzner, and after that I'm not sure how much it matters.

Alzner has to be here to stay. He's +5 after 15 NHL games, and he just looks solid to me.

I believe I did hear the Hockey Night in Canada guys saying the other week basically that the Caps would be foolish to let Alzner go.

I think it'd be great to have Pothier back someday.

Sloan is +2 after tonight's game, his 23rd, but was +0 going into tonight. I dunno about him.

Collins hasn't played 10 games yet, so I dunno about him.

But Erskine and Morrisson are just about even every year and neither really has any offensive stats to speak of. I guess I don't have an objection if you want to replace them with Collins and/or Sloan. I think Alzner should be higher on the ladder than all four of them though.

Posted by: youaresquishy | December 27, 2008 12:09 AM | Report abuse


okies... well, look, we won, and it was a wonderful win.

Pawz, Section117 I think Collins and Alzner gained a spot on the team. Possibly Helmer. I think Erskine or Schultz have to gain back that spot now.

Tuesday @ BUF is going to be really really tough. They'll want revenge...

Posted by: mauree | December 27, 2008 12:12 AM | Report abuse

The physical presence of Erskine is sometimes pretty useful, though, I have to say. He is a very large person. But then he seems to sometimes get called for penalties too much.

Schultz was the best +/- defender on the Caps last year. It'll be nice to have him back. He's the most important one, defensively speaking, I think.

Posted by: youaresquishy | December 27, 2008 12:15 AM | Report abuse

Oh, no argument that he's on probation and has been mediocre and inconsistent, but the negativity and booing does not help him or the Caps, and makes the problem worse. Remember that a goalie's mindset is half his battle, and by booing him, you're disrupting that. Dislike Theodore if you must - I haven't given up on him yet - but don't boo him, you're just making the problem worse.

All I'm asking is that you give him credit when he earns it, and don't make the problem worse by booing him.

Posted by: kittypawz | December 27, 2008 12:19 AM | Report abuse

Two things I don't understand about hockey:

(1) Why kicking the puck into the net is not allowed.

(2) Why the Buffalo goal tonight, where Afinoginev or however you spell it jumped in the air and it went in off his leg or his skate, is allowed.

In both cases, the person is deliberately doing an act. In both cases, the puck is going in off a body part and not a stick. In both cases, the deliberate act is causing the puck to go into the net.

I don't like the no-kicking rule, but until it's changed, I don't see why players should be allowed to score by jumping and thereby causing the puck to go into the net off their skates or legs or anything other than their sticks.

Posted by: youaresquishy | December 27, 2008 12:31 AM | Report abuse

And in neither case do you have to actually be trying to score a goal for it to be disallowed. If your kick propels the puck into the net, it's no good, so why should a jump that propels the puck into the net be OK?

Posted by: youaresquishy | December 27, 2008 12:33 AM | Report abuse

I also doubt it's wise to boo Theodore. He seems to lack confidence a little. I have a feeling he's the kind of player that won't get more confidence by hearing boos.

I think we're probably stuck with Theodore, for better or worse, for the rest of the year. I think Johnson is, at least, a solid backup NHL goalie, and if he has to be the primary goalie that might be good enough. I'm not ready to crown Varlamov after two good games. He doesn't even have that many AHL games under his belt.

It's not impossible to win it all without stellar goaltending. With this owner, this GM, this coach, these Alexes, Backstrom, and Mike Green, I believe anything is possible. This is a special group right here. I've never seen anything like this team. The character, the talent, and the ability to come back in games when the odds are against them, as demonstrated repeatedly late last year and this year, are oozing from their pores. What a great team. They just know how to win.

Posted by: youaresquishy | December 27, 2008 1:00 AM | Report abuse

simply sensational.

Posted by: SombreroGuy | December 27, 2008 2:17 AM | Report abuse

Im thinking that there are no kicking goals allowed in hockey to keep the Richard Zednick type injuries to a min.You are thinking of soccer, where the players fake their injuries.I dont think Vanek was faking that Ovechkin shot to the leg last night,eh?

Posted by: darkdarcus | December 27, 2008 11:37 AM | Report abuse

Im thinking that there are no kicking goals allowed in hockey to keep the Richard Zednick type injuries to a min.You are thinking of soccer, where the players fake their injuries.I dont think Vanek was faking that Ovechkin shot to the leg last night,eh?

Posted by: darkdarcus | December 27, 2008 11:39 AM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company