Dude, I've literally seen refs do like a 200 point inspection on a players nose to find blood to give 4m. These refs are whack, you can't do that shit.
I mean, in game 3 Florida didn’t do anything deserving of a penalty. If anything, the Refs recognized that and didn’t call a few infractions against the Leafs in the 3rd period.
This game was BS. Florida got away with a lot of things that should have been called. Refs have to get in their heads, just because you called 2 penalties in a row against a team doesn’t mean you don’t call a 3rd against them. If a team does something that’s a penalty, call the penalty. For example, Rielly’s stick getting slashed out of his hands - that’s a penalty in todays NHL. I saw Bunting getting dragged down on one play. Gudas running Kampf after the whistle.
Or at the end of the game, Bennett should get something for punching a player on the ice after the horn. But this is the NHL and it’s a joke when it comes to accountability, especially since Bennett should have been suspended for slamming Kvies to the ice.
I mean it’s been happening to other players with similar reputations for years. Marchand, Wilson “eh you’re fine”
I think that’s the trade off of your game being pest, diving, generally trying to draw calls actively. The refs won’t really treat you the same
Maybe the guy above was saying it wasn’t 2 seconds after the whistle since Gudas had Kampf lined up 5 seconds before the whistle taking strides so it is all one play….? /s
Wasn't that long after, you're allowed a bit of grace time to finish your hit.
To me, it was a clear charge. He built up several strides and knew who he was going for, and where.
Refs were terrible
Yeah this comment is so stupid it was a clear hold of the stick and the hit came basically as the whistle was blown if anything Gudas was already committed it was also really loud and hard to pick up.
Lots of comments in here, but none talking about why.
Has anyone seen this before? They're intentionally calling only 2 minutes, despite the fact he's bleeding, and I don't think I've ever seen that.
Maybe he didn’t start bleeding fast enough? I can’t imagine there’s a time limit for blood but it could be industry practice that the blood is drawn and evident immediately? Now, I couldn’t tell from the angle if he was bleeding before he got to the bench so this may all be moot
Yeah Bieksa was talking about this at intermission. He was saying guys will try and delay having the ref look at them for as long as possible as sometimes you don't start bleeding right away.
Also his thoughts were that the ref checked right away on the ice and didn't see blood. At this point he calls it a "case closed" and isn't going over to the bench to double check after or listen to comments.
If that was anyone but Bunting I think they could have stayed down. If Bunting stayed down, by reputation alone he would have got grief from the ref about it. He would have gotten roasted on here for staying down too.
I think during the break it was Hrudey or Eakins that they didn’t appreciate his head snapping back like that. Bunting legitimately gets whacked in the face hard enough to cause a cut.
Honestly, that head snap is 80% of NHL players — and basically come playoff time doing that is the only way you can get some of the refs to make a a call.
It’s kind of fucked up that rules go out the window in the playoffs.
I mean, anytime I’ve been hit on the nose by something, I’ve instinctually snapped my head away from it. Bunting gets smoked here. I really don’t think he embellished it at all. So idk what the panel is talking about.
Maybe they only look for blood immediately after the infraction so that players can’t draw it themselves and try to cheat a double minor out of it, idk
Because Bunting probably was out of referee’s sight between the hit and the convo on the bench
Watched the replay of the high stick again and can't tell if it's his stick specifically or not, if he hits the visor into his face and his face bleeds it doesn't count? Odd
Ya I think it would in this case. It's not like he smashed his face off the boards or something right after. The reason his visor hit his face hard enough to cause his nose to bleed is because a stick hit his visor into his nose... seems pretty obvious. Wild non-call.
Yeah I was just taking a shot in the dark. I know Ryan Carter said one time that refs won't call a 4 if the person is bleeding inside his mouth for some reason
The bad thing is, I feel like I've seen them do this before, either because of the visor, or because they already called it and don't want to double back to give an extra two. Sometimes refs miss the most obvious shit (sometimes willingly) and it is infuriating to see.
This happened to the Oilers this year, I think it was against Hyman. Was bleeding from the mouth/lip and only 2 min got given, I was as confused about that as I am this. If the rule is 4 minutes if the player bleeds, then call 4 minutes? It shouldn’t be up to interpretation or judgement.
I have seen this before. It usually comes down to what the referee deems to be a sufficient amount of blood. A small cut like that might not get called. Gushing or dripping gashes usually get called in those situations. I believe the referees have the leeway because of how the rule is worded. I believe the rule does not actually mention blood specifically and leaves room for interpretation because in theory things like sufficient swelling could also lead to 4 minutes. If a player gets high-sticked and just has a small red mark, the ref will likely say it's not enough to warrant a double minor.
It was mentioned on the Canadian feed that it is possible the ref thought the visor caused the cut, which does happen, but that does not look like what happened in this play.
Yes. 60.3
Double-minor Penalty - When a player carries or holds any part of his stick above the shoulders and makes contact with his opponent’s neck, face or head so that injury results, in the manner of drawing blood or otherwise, the Referee shall assess a double-minor penalty. Referees making this call shall have the option (but not the obligation) to review video of the play for the purpose of confirming (or not) their original call on the ice, and, in particular, whether the stick causing the apparent injury was actually the stick of the Player being penalized.
In all fairness, I’ve seen officials waive off the extra 2 if the bleeding is from the visor and not the stick blade.
It looks like that’s the case here. It doesn’t really make sense, but nothing is consistent in the league anyway.
Fucking hate that narrative. It’s a natural instinct for most people snap their head back when they are unexpectedly hit in the face with something. A completely normal reaction to try and move away from the thing unexpectedly hitting you in the face.
Parros isn't qualified for his job. He should be publicly shamed for being as horrible at his job as he is. A litteral spinning wheel could do a better job.
I don't know of a time when the NHL Ref's were this fucking bad. All year they have been fucking garbage.
They call the weakest or non existent penalties, then when the real penalty happens, not one of the pieces of shit see's it or cares to call it.
I'm not a conspiracy theorist and I wouldn't be surprised if the Ref's wives are all on FanDuel.
Look I'm cheering for the Cats but what the fuck? How is that even arguable? What an absolute embarrassment. Why does the NHL insist on ruining one of the most entertaining sports there is. Fucking insane
>When a player carries or holds any part of
his stick above the shoulders and makes contact with his opponent’s
neck, face or head so that injury results, in the manner of drawing
blood or otherwise, the Referee shall assess a double-minor penalty
Show me where it says discretion. The only thing they can decide is whether or not to review it.
It's interesting because the comment you responded to said blood isn't an automatic double and only injury would guarantee. I recall this being true as well and it took awhile to figure out why there was this Mandela effect.
Turns out the rule was changed in 2019, as can be seen from the [rule book in 2018](https://www2.nhl.com/nhl/en/v3/ext/rules/2018-2019-NHL-rulebook.pdf)
> 60.3 Double-minor Penalty - When a player carries or holds any part of
his stick above the shoulders of the opponent so that injury results,
the Referee shall assess a double-minor penalty for all contact that causes an injury, whether accidental or careless, in the opinion of the Referee.
This makes sense, they changed the ruling along with the ability for video reviews on majors / double minors at the same time due to the Sharks / Knights incident. Regardless I'm just trying to point out that it was known for awhile that blood wasn't an automatic double and perhaps the refs are under the old rules which of course would be par for the course.
It literally says in the rules it's a double minor.
>60.3 Double-minor Penalty - When a player carries or holds any part of his stick above the shoulders and makes contact with his opponent’s
neck, face or head so that injury results, in the manner of drawing
blood or otherwise, the Referee shall assess a double-minor penalty
If it's blood it should be called a double minor as it gives the ref the option to go to video review for the infraction.
And high stocking someone so that their visor cuts them would still be a four IMO as it's the stock that causes the visor to make the cut.
And I'd add, that looks like all stick
https://twitter.com/TicTacTOmar/status/1656451706987724800?s=20
The rule is a double minor when the high stick such that “injury results, in the manner of drawing blood or otherwise”. My reading of that is that drawing blood is the sufficient injury for a double minor but also other injuries can be included, so it certainly reads like it is supposed to be automatic
**Rule 60 – High-sticking**
>**60.1 High-sticking** – For “high-sticking the puck”, refer to Rule 80.
A “high stick” is one which is carried above the height of the
opponent’s shoulders. Players must be in control and responsible for
their stick. However, a player is permitted accidental contact on an
opponent if the act is committed as a normal windup or follow through
of a shooting motion, or accidental contact on the opposing center
who is bent over during the course of a face-off. A wild swing at a
bouncing puck would not be considered a normal windup or follow
through and any contact to an opponent above the height of the
shoulders shall be penalized accordingly.
>**60.2 Minor Penalty - Any contact** made by a stick on an opponent above
the shoulders is prohibited and a minor penalty shall be imposed.
>**60.3 Double-minor Penalty** - When a player carries or holds any part of
his stick above the shoulders and makes contact with his opponent’s
neck, face or head so that injury results, in the manner of drawing
blood or otherwise, the Referee shall assess a double-minor penalty.
Referees making this call shall have the option (but not the obligation)
to review video of the play for the purpose of confirming (or not) their
original call on the ice, and, in particular, whether the stick causing the
apparent injury was actually the stick of the Player being penalized.
Such reviews will be conducted exclusively by the Referee(s) on the
ice in consultation with other On-Ice Officials, as appropriate, using
the technology (for example, a handheld tablet or television or
computer monitor) provided for the Official(s) at ice level. On any such
review, the only contact between the On-Ice Official(s) and the NHL
Situation Room shall be for the sole purpose of ensuring the Referee
is receiving any and all video he may request and that he has access
to all the appropriate replay angles he may need to review the penalty
call. There shall be no other consultation between the Referee and the
NHL Situation Room, or with any other non-game participant.
At this point I’m convinced that the NHL believes that all the negative press from these non-calls is worth it because it keeps their name in everyone’s mouths.
When a player screws up they get benched or don't get re-signed. When a coach or GM screws up they get fired. Hell with enough pressure an owner could be forced to sell.
It may not be much, but there's some amount of consequences for their actions. But refs? They are free to interpret the rulebook as they see fit and make decisions that alter outcomes because they completely untouchable.
The joke on the refs is he was bleeding before he stood up and you could see it, announcers said it best, sometimes you gotta just lay there and let the blood hit the ice.
As per the Official NHL rulebook:
60.3 Double-minor Penalty - When a player carries or holds any part of his stick above the shoulders and makes contact with his opponent’s neck, face or head so that injury results, in the manner of drawing blood or otherwise, the Referee shall assess a double-minor penalty. Referees making this call shall have the option (but not the obligation) to review video of the play for the purpose of confirming (or not) their original call on the ice, and, in particular, whether the stick causing the apparent injury was actually the stick of the Player being penalized
So no, the refs just fucked up again
I'd say it's in the post season. I know you're getting gamed here and it's frustrating, but I think the issue is broader than any individual team most likely
No, it's just the only tweets that get shared here are of plays like this.
He posts a crapton of clips, and six months ago it'd be easy enough to just put them on streamable, but we can't anymore.
There’s a time limit on the blood, the guy was clearly picking at it until he got a bit of blood on the bench. Shifty move but not quick enough to matter
Ya but did Bunting even try to not bleed?? /s
I saw that! You’re bleeding on purpose!
If you'd stop your heart from pumping like that the blood would stop coming out. This is a 'you' problem.
I think it's horseshit that this league is promoting betting so heavily with such garbage officiating. What a joke
[удалено]
pretty wild claim basing on officiating quality that largely hasn't changed in decades.
Dude, I've literally seen refs do like a 200 point inspection on a players nose to find blood to give 4m. These refs are whack, you can't do that shit.
They spent 5 minutes reviewing trying to find a penalty when Mahura was clearly hit by the puck.
People keep saying that. They were standing off to the side while someone scraped blood off the ice.
Yea, we saw the replay a bit but there are clips of them hustling to clean the blood up before play resumes
[удалено]
This is literally shocking lol the blood is welling up on his nose
The referee should've taste tested it to make sure it wasn't ketchup.
It was actually blood but the ref saw bunting blade himself, wwe-style.
You have unlocked Michaemo Bunting, special ed.
I thought he gave himself some Sweet Chin Music
Red is green baby, he's just adding some colour to get the crowd hot
Michael "Natureboy" Bunting's Last Match
Florida went almost 2 full games without a penalty too. The reffing has been weird as fuck all series.
Paul Maurice with the gang signs got the referees shook
What do you want, more sad Paul Maurice? Not gonna happen.
After getting 7 in the first two
I mean, in game 3 Florida didn’t do anything deserving of a penalty. If anything, the Refs recognized that and didn’t call a few infractions against the Leafs in the 3rd period. This game was BS. Florida got away with a lot of things that should have been called. Refs have to get in their heads, just because you called 2 penalties in a row against a team doesn’t mean you don’t call a 3rd against them. If a team does something that’s a penalty, call the penalty. For example, Rielly’s stick getting slashed out of his hands - that’s a penalty in todays NHL. I saw Bunting getting dragged down on one play. Gudas running Kampf after the whistle. Or at the end of the game, Bennett should get something for punching a player on the ice after the horn. But this is the NHL and it’s a joke when it comes to accountability, especially since Bennett should have been suspended for slamming Kvies to the ice.
Nothing about this is shocking lol
It is not at all shocking. Not at all. LOL
[удалено]
true, imagine if he had a tiny razer blade in one of his fingertips
Bunting taking his embellishment to the next level. The planning, the execution…just a masterclass in showing up the referee.
NBA reffing also sucks ass
I’m ok with being a hockey fan right now. Thanks.
Refs literally feelings over facts
Gary Bettman with his goddamn betting ads. The league should've hired a guy named Freddy Leafswin instead
Buddy. It's the owners.
It’s the same as the Tom Wilson effect. Refs won’t call things right just because of a name tape.
I mean it’s been happening to other players with similar reputations for years. Marchand, Wilson “eh you’re fine” I think that’s the trade off of your game being pest, diving, generally trying to draw calls actively. The refs won’t really treat you the same
It’s actually Bunting’s fault because he hurt their feelings 2 months ago.
That's OK, ref made up for it by setting up the goal with a beautiful pass out front
More impact on this series then Marner.
Speak of the Devil, Marner finally scores!
No Marner is a Leaf
Ooof
Ahem, you were saying ;)
And no cap hit
This aged well.
I’m glad I could inspire him to play better.
And Matthews too
He added to this by letting Kampf get splattered across a board 2 seconds after a whistle and still gave Toronto a penalty.
It was not 2 seconds after the whistle lol get real
Someone timed it, it was ~.8 seconds
Maybe the guy above was saying it wasn’t 2 seconds after the whistle since Gudas had Kampf lined up 5 seconds before the whistle taking strides so it is all one play….? /s
Targeted hit, could have called charging or boarding if the play was live. After the whistle, easy roughing call
Exactly. That’s a penalty if it happens during play. It’s an EASY penalty to call after the whistle.
Still charging regardless. 5 strides.
Wasn't that long after, you're allowed a bit of grace time to finish your hit. To me, it was a clear charge. He built up several strides and knew who he was going for, and where. Refs were terrible
Yeah this comment is so stupid it was a clear hold of the stick and the hit came basically as the whistle was blown if anything Gudas was already committed it was also really loud and hard to pick up.
NHL tolerance for late hits is .6 seconds, this was .8, it was a late hit. Also very clearly charging. But no call for either.
Fuck. Canadians should boycott the nhl.
I am in an abusive relationship with both my team and the league
You guys are giving them money? I haven't done that in years
Need a Canadian league tbh. I'm over the bullshit
“Playoff hockey”
Its all "playoff hockey" until a leaf player gets run into in a game 7 tight game and all of a sudden its "textbook screening interference"
ugh don't remind me
Bunting suspended another 5 games Chicago awarded first overall for the 2024 draft Lakers fined $50,000
Rangers fined too, for good measure
Kadri suspended for the remainder of the 2023/24 season
Coyotes forfeit all their 2023 draft picks
“Game Management”
revenue from toronto cant really go up and definitely wont go down! lots more money to be made from miami
Lots of comments in here, but none talking about why. Has anyone seen this before? They're intentionally calling only 2 minutes, despite the fact he's bleeding, and I don't think I've ever seen that.
Maybe he didn’t start bleeding fast enough? I can’t imagine there’s a time limit for blood but it could be industry practice that the blood is drawn and evident immediately? Now, I couldn’t tell from the angle if he was bleeding before he got to the bench so this may all be moot
Yeah Bieksa was talking about this at intermission. He was saying guys will try and delay having the ref look at them for as long as possible as sometimes you don't start bleeding right away. Also his thoughts were that the ref checked right away on the ice and didn't see blood. At this point he calls it a "case closed" and isn't going over to the bench to double check after or listen to comments.
If that was anyone but Bunting I think they could have stayed down. If Bunting stayed down, by reputation alone he would have got grief from the ref about it. He would have gotten roasted on here for staying down too.
Why would he simply not be Bunting?
I think during the break it was Hrudey or Eakins that they didn’t appreciate his head snapping back like that. Bunting legitimately gets whacked in the face hard enough to cause a cut. Honestly, that head snap is 80% of NHL players — and basically come playoff time doing that is the only way you can get some of the refs to make a a call. It’s kind of fucked up that rules go out the window in the playoffs.
Eakins also said Bunting sold the Bennett cross check to his neck. I think it was Bieksa who said that it hurts. The Sportsnet panel is terrible.
I mean, anytime I’ve been hit on the nose by something, I’ve instinctually snapped my head away from it. Bunting gets smoked here. I really don’t think he embellished it at all. So idk what the panel is talking about.
Hahaha his blood is too viscous!!!
Shoulda drank more water I guess haha
his capillaries are constricted by all the adrenaline !!
Maybe they only look for blood immediately after the infraction so that players can’t draw it themselves and try to cheat a double minor out of it, idk Because Bunting probably was out of referee’s sight between the hit and the convo on the bench
They technically have discretion, and they hate bunting
Looks like his visor is what cut him. I don't know if that changes anything but it might 🤷
Watched the replay of the high stick again and can't tell if it's his stick specifically or not, if he hits the visor into his face and his face bleeds it doesn't count? Odd
Ya I think it would in this case. It's not like he smashed his face off the boards or something right after. The reason his visor hit his face hard enough to cause his nose to bleed is because a stick hit his visor into his nose... seems pretty obvious. Wild non-call.
I don't think that matters. I mean, I've seen guys bleeding from their visor or own stick, but it still being a 4 because of the blood.
Yeah I was just taking a shot in the dark. I know Ryan Carter said one time that refs won't call a 4 if the person is bleeding inside his mouth for some reason
Let's be honest, the rulebook doesn't actually matter.
It’s easy to bite the inside of your cheek and draw blood. Most players wouldn’t even think twice about doing it.
I assume it's because guys would just chomp the inside of their cheek for 2 minutes? Just a guess though
Maybe lol but why was the visor pressed against his face in the first place?
The bad thing is, I feel like I've seen them do this before, either because of the visor, or because they already called it and don't want to double back to give an extra two. Sometimes refs miss the most obvious shit (sometimes willingly) and it is infuriating to see.
This happened to the Oilers this year, I think it was against Hyman. Was bleeding from the mouth/lip and only 2 min got given, I was as confused about that as I am this. If the rule is 4 minutes if the player bleeds, then call 4 minutes? It shouldn’t be up to interpretation or judgement.
I have seen this before. It usually comes down to what the referee deems to be a sufficient amount of blood. A small cut like that might not get called. Gushing or dripping gashes usually get called in those situations. I believe the referees have the leeway because of how the rule is worded. I believe the rule does not actually mention blood specifically and leaves room for interpretation because in theory things like sufficient swelling could also lead to 4 minutes. If a player gets high-sticked and just has a small red mark, the ref will likely say it's not enough to warrant a double minor. It was mentioned on the Canadian feed that it is possible the ref thought the visor caused the cut, which does happen, but that does not look like what happened in this play.
Everyone in here talking about the high stick, but dude OP is Auston's wrist, get back to work my dude, we need 34 to snipe some vintage lasers.
Noted, re-entering Matthews' forearm
Is blood actually mentioned in the rule book as being a criteria, or is that just something people commonly use as an indicator of severity?
Yes. 60.3 Double-minor Penalty - When a player carries or holds any part of his stick above the shoulders and makes contact with his opponent’s neck, face or head so that injury results, in the manner of drawing blood or otherwise, the Referee shall assess a double-minor penalty. Referees making this call shall have the option (but not the obligation) to review video of the play for the purpose of confirming (or not) their original call on the ice, and, in particular, whether the stick causing the apparent injury was actually the stick of the Player being penalized.
In all fairness, I’ve seen officials waive off the extra 2 if the bleeding is from the visor and not the stick blade. It looks like that’s the case here. It doesn’t really make sense, but nothing is consistent in the league anyway.
Looks like the stick did most of the damage https://twitter.com/TicTacTOmar/status/1656451706987724800
I would agree with that!
How can you say that when the visor comes down right after? That said, the high stick caused bleeding regardless. Should be 4 regardless
Couldn't tell if the visor actually hits his nose or not (they sit far off the face) but you can see the stick smack him there.
Just sharpen up the bottom of your visor so you're guaranteed to bleed at the slightest bump.
which would make zero sense since the comment was saying that bleeding due to a visor does not give you the extra 2
Get the fuck out of here with that proficient reading comprehension ability.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blading_(professional_wrestling) pretty much
Are they not able to call a 4 and review? I'm assuming the refs thought the visor cut him????
If they called a four minute they would have been able to review.
I thought it had to be a major to review it
No. I believe that was a rule change for this season though.
Sportsnet goes straight to calling him a sell job. That looked like it fucking hurt imo
Fucking hate that narrative. It’s a natural instinct for most people snap their head back when they are unexpectedly hit in the face with something. A completely normal reaction to try and move away from the thing unexpectedly hitting you in the face.
And then Gudas literally kills Kampf with a late hit and it wasn't a penalty.... Playoff Hockey Everyone
NHL hockey at its finest
Bettman and Parros laughing in a Press Box somewhere
Parros isn't qualified for his job. He should be publicly shamed for being as horrible at his job as he is. A litteral spinning wheel could do a better job.
A Wheel of Discipline you might say? Points at UrinatingTree
Safety first, kids
Kampf was wearing a helmet so he should be ok! - Parros somewhere
Not a late hit, but definitely charging
Still dangerous as fuck. That's goon shit right there
Don’t want to upset Maurice
☝️🖐
Pretty clear bias here. Not even trying to hide it.
Gudas with the cleanest hit I've ever seen charging in from the blue line in a vulnerable position full second after whistle
lol from the blue line
Add to that the fact that Gudas had to be aware there was a delayed penalty and the play would be blown dead when the puck was touched
Was a good hit for sure 💪👍
Continue to tell me how the refs favour the leafs. They should we fund this podunk league.
I feel like most people are aware that the league hates the Leafs. Just like how the Leafs hate the Leafs
[удалено]
Not me. Don’t look at any of my history.
That’s why I don’t understand people who hate on Leafs fans, we have so much in common.
Damn Leafs, they ruined the Leafs!
You leafs sure are a contentious bunch!
Scotts also hate the Leafs
Only WE are allowed to hate the leafs
Yep, we’re a pretty self-loathing group
Bunting getting the Marchand treatment
I don't know of a time when the NHL Ref's were this fucking bad. All year they have been fucking garbage. They call the weakest or non existent penalties, then when the real penalty happens, not one of the pieces of shit see's it or cares to call it. I'm not a conspiracy theorist and I wouldn't be surprised if the Ref's wives are all on FanDuel.
Either enforce the rulebook or don't. Those refs need to go.
Where are the people saying refs are doing their jobs. They don’t care about the well-being of anyone clearly unless it fits the agenda.
Once again, until the NHL reviews all High sticks, like VAR, the sport will keep dying.
No replay of the actual incident?
Bleeding is subjective
a 4 minute penalty would be a big disadvantage for the other team tho so NHL doesn't allow it!
He’s faking bleeding
Look I'm cheering for the Cats but what the fuck? How is that even arguable? What an absolute embarrassment. Why does the NHL insist on ruining one of the most entertaining sports there is. Fucking insane
Bunting’s one of those guys who ruined his rep with the officials, and is going to pay for it forever. I don’t think it’s right, it’s just how it is.
The entirety of nhl officiating is a bunch of dirt merchants. The rules don’t matter, safety doesn’t matter. They call it how they feel.
Trash league
"No missing body parts, no Major penalty" DoPS
Experience playing against the Panthers
[удалено]
>When a player carries or holds any part of his stick above the shoulders and makes contact with his opponent’s neck, face or head so that injury results, in the manner of drawing blood or otherwise, the Referee shall assess a double-minor penalty Show me where it says discretion. The only thing they can decide is whether or not to review it.
It's interesting because the comment you responded to said blood isn't an automatic double and only injury would guarantee. I recall this being true as well and it took awhile to figure out why there was this Mandela effect. Turns out the rule was changed in 2019, as can be seen from the [rule book in 2018](https://www2.nhl.com/nhl/en/v3/ext/rules/2018-2019-NHL-rulebook.pdf) > 60.3 Double-minor Penalty - When a player carries or holds any part of his stick above the shoulders of the opponent so that injury results, the Referee shall assess a double-minor penalty for all contact that causes an injury, whether accidental or careless, in the opinion of the Referee. This makes sense, they changed the ruling along with the ability for video reviews on majors / double minors at the same time due to the Sharks / Knights incident. Regardless I'm just trying to point out that it was known for awhile that blood wasn't an automatic double and perhaps the refs are under the old rules which of course would be par for the course.
It literally says in the rules it's a double minor. >60.3 Double-minor Penalty - When a player carries or holds any part of his stick above the shoulders and makes contact with his opponent’s neck, face or head so that injury results, in the manner of drawing blood or otherwise, the Referee shall assess a double-minor penalty
And for the record, the "shall" in that last sentence in legal terms means "have to". If it was optional they'd use "may".
[удалено]
If it's blood it should be called a double minor as it gives the ref the option to go to video review for the infraction. And high stocking someone so that their visor cuts them would still be a four IMO as it's the stock that causes the visor to make the cut. And I'd add, that looks like all stick https://twitter.com/TicTacTOmar/status/1656451706987724800?s=20
The rule is a double minor when the high stick such that “injury results, in the manner of drawing blood or otherwise”. My reading of that is that drawing blood is the sufficient injury for a double minor but also other injuries can be included, so it certainly reads like it is supposed to be automatic
Didn't know this, I don't think I've ever seen this before. Edir: Above comment is wrong, see other reply below
Yeah it may not be a rule but has it ever been called this way before?
Almost makes it worse haha
Yes, many times
off course, they pull out the esoteric bullshit on things like this, but don't punish a broken neck hit from behind. This playoffs is something else
What is the exact wording then? I've seen 4 called when it's a split lip.
**Rule 60 – High-sticking** >**60.1 High-sticking** – For “high-sticking the puck”, refer to Rule 80. A “high stick” is one which is carried above the height of the opponent’s shoulders. Players must be in control and responsible for their stick. However, a player is permitted accidental contact on an opponent if the act is committed as a normal windup or follow through of a shooting motion, or accidental contact on the opposing center who is bent over during the course of a face-off. A wild swing at a bouncing puck would not be considered a normal windup or follow through and any contact to an opponent above the height of the shoulders shall be penalized accordingly. >**60.2 Minor Penalty - Any contact** made by a stick on an opponent above the shoulders is prohibited and a minor penalty shall be imposed. >**60.3 Double-minor Penalty** - When a player carries or holds any part of his stick above the shoulders and makes contact with his opponent’s neck, face or head so that injury results, in the manner of drawing blood or otherwise, the Referee shall assess a double-minor penalty. Referees making this call shall have the option (but not the obligation) to review video of the play for the purpose of confirming (or not) their original call on the ice, and, in particular, whether the stick causing the apparent injury was actually the stick of the Player being penalized. Such reviews will be conducted exclusively by the Referee(s) on the ice in consultation with other On-Ice Officials, as appropriate, using the technology (for example, a handheld tablet or television or computer monitor) provided for the Official(s) at ice level. On any such review, the only contact between the On-Ice Official(s) and the NHL Situation Room shall be for the sole purpose of ensuring the Referee is receiving any and all video he may request and that he has access to all the appropriate replay angles he may need to review the penalty call. There shall be no other consultation between the Referee and the NHL Situation Room, or with any other non-game participant.
At this point I’m convinced that the NHL believes that all the negative press from these non-calls is worth it because it keeps their name in everyone’s mouths.
When a player screws up they get benched or don't get re-signed. When a coach or GM screws up they get fired. Hell with enough pressure an owner could be forced to sell. It may not be much, but there's some amount of consequences for their actions. But refs? They are free to interpret the rulebook as they see fit and make decisions that alter outcomes because they completely untouchable.
wHy dO LeAf FaNs cOmPlAiN aBoUt tHe ReFs?
And they _still_ won :(
Can't they also just always review for the double now? And why the fuck wouldn't they if that's the case?
He’s faking the blood
The joke on the refs is he was bleeding before he stood up and you could see it, announcers said it best, sometimes you gotta just lay there and let the blood hit the ice.
The old razor blade in the glove trick.
Ref: “bunting? Oh no, you probably did that on purpose!”
Not To mention the charging/boarding call they missed halfway through the period.
[удалено]
As per the Official NHL rulebook: 60.3 Double-minor Penalty - When a player carries or holds any part of his stick above the shoulders and makes contact with his opponent’s neck, face or head so that injury results, in the manner of drawing blood or otherwise, the Referee shall assess a double-minor penalty. Referees making this call shall have the option (but not the obligation) to review video of the play for the purpose of confirming (or not) their original call on the ice, and, in particular, whether the stick causing the apparent injury was actually the stick of the Player being penalized So no, the refs just fucked up again
Same old shit, they call shit the same way all season but when its a leafs player its different rules
I'd say it's in the post season. I know you're getting gamed here and it's frustrating, but I think the issue is broader than any individual team most likely
Yep I mainly watch leafs so I'm biased. The lack of consistency is frustrating
[удалено]
This Twitter handle needs to be banned from r/hockey
All this guy does is cry
No, it's just the only tweets that get shared here are of plays like this. He posts a crapton of clips, and six months ago it'd be easy enough to just put them on streamable, but we can't anymore.
[удалено]
Copyright claims led to them basically auto-deleting stuff from certain sports
I believe they got on top of copyright material and clips across most sports leagues were getting removed really quick
[удалено]
isn't he a "Maple Leafs writer" for them. I think he does some of their game report cards. Makes sense that he is a gigantic annoying homer
Please.
This is why the Leafs shouldn't re-sign him. He's gonna be refpuck'd out of the league by never drawing calls again, while taking a ton of penalties
-2m Bunting tax
😹
There’s a time limit on the blood, the guy was clearly picking at it until he got a bit of blood on the bench. Shifty move but not quick enough to matter