And if you score on continuation when fouled in basketball, it's a shot. If you don't score, it's not a shot. In hockey, they don't give own goals. Every season it happens once or twice that a goal is scored without an offensive player ever touching the puck. They assign a goal and a "shot" to whoever the closest offensive player is.
Yes, it just makes me smile because it's there solely to make sure there's no situation where a stat doesn't exist to describe it (ie every shot must be made or rebounded). Btw, if the rebound goes directly out of bounds, that's also a "team rebound."
The point about continuation in basketball is a good one. I suppose my aversion to a Shot on Goal is simply a semantic one. What do you mean it's not a shot on goal? It hit the damn goal! On a different note, I couldn't pick Jack Jewsbury out of a line up with a gun to my head.
Is it so hard to picture the "goal" as that plane of space inside the frame? Thus the posts and cross bars are NOT "the goal" and all the confusion is resolved.
Fair illustration with a shot off the rim although I think it's a little bit off. I think a closer analogy would a shot in the NBA that's goal tended.
Actally it's the last offensive player to touch the puck. This is how the first goalie ever to score a goal got his goal. And it happens more than once or twice, the puck deflecting off a defenders stick and going in off a shot from the point (or just inside the blue line for those who don't know) is common.
Okay, I just came by to see how the hell a thread entitled "Jack Jewsbury" ended up at 17 frickin' pages.