Offensive Goaltending?

[Scrapper1]

Originally Posted by Dan_ref

But let's get back on topic: if a shot is errant how can you possibly judge it has a chance to go in?

Does "errant" just mean that the shot misses? If so, then lots of shots that miss have a CHANCE of going in while they're still in the air and outside the cylinder. They're close, they just don't actually go in.

It's quite possible that I'm misunderstanding the nuances of "errant". If it means "clearly short", then I agree with Dan_ref. But in normal language, lots of shots have a reasonable chance of going in but then miss.

[Dan_ref]

Originally Posted by Scrapper1

Does "errant" just mean that the shot misses? If so, then lots of shots that miss have a CHANCE of going in while they're still in the air and outside the cylinder. They're close, they just don't actually go in.

Well, it's not my word it's sh1thead's word (apologies if I'm being insulting, but you see I have self-esteem issues) and of course it doesn't appear in the rule book. Here are some common definitions for errant:

- straying from the right course or from accepted standards; "errant youngsters"

- uncontrolled motion that is irregular or unpredictable; "an errant breeze"

You tell me if an 'errant shot' has a chance to go in. All I can tell you is there are 2 types of shots relative to GT: shots that have a chance of going in and shots that do not have a chance of going in. To extend that to the universe of unfair advantage that sh1thead (damn! I did it again!) describes above is just, well, silly.