How do Professional Referees still keep falling plays like this (Pietrangelo embellishment)...and why cant all penalties be challenged?

[Tryblot]

In what world is this even embellishment?

Canucks fans are used so used to their own team diving all over the place and getting calls, that it's become egregious if another team tries it against them. It's their thing, and only their thing. No one else can take it away from them.

 

[HugeInTheShire]

That's not even the best part: they'd likely take 20 minutes to review it on top of that.

Yep reviewing penalties is a bad idea, sure it sucks when your team gets dinged with a BS call but it usually evens out in the end.

 

[TropicOfNoReturn]

Remember, this is the same player that two-hand tomahawk slashed Draisaitl in the playoffs last year.

He's a pathetic little bitch.

You're right, Draisaitl is. You can add pissy to the list of adjectives as well.

 

[Mattb124]

What would be the point of challenging this? So they can change the call from a 2 minute minor for high sticking to a 2 minute minor for cross checking?

To walk back the high sticking penalty and ensuing power play which materially affected the game at the time. That should be obvious.

 

[Chootoi]

I actually don't blame the refs in these situations. The game is crazy fast, especially at ice level. We all have the benefit of unobstructed overhead views and frame by frame slow-mo. These guys have to make a split second decision sometimes looking around bodies or being behind the play, or whatever. There's just as many guys that get cut open that get missed. It's part of the game and a really difficult job.

But the league could absolutely be stepping in the day after with fines and/or suspensions to send a message to cut the shit out. But they don't. There's the odd stint where you see some 2K fines or whatever but it never escalates from there. They probably don't want to have to deal with the whining from the PA.

 

[WhataKnight]

Remember, this is the same player that two-hand tomahawk slashed Draisaitl in the playoffs last year.

He's a pathetic little bitch.

LOL…..can of sardines and a sad trombone over here.

Same could be said for how cheap the Oilers were playing in that series before Petro got sick of it and over-shot. Petro showing Drai what FAFO means 10 months ago has zippo to do with this.

Also, this ain’t embellishment. Cheers

 

[Tom Polakis]

Just now watched the video taken from a TV screen. If that's really the level of penalty that you want to have reviewed and overturned, then we will indeed have ridiculously long games. Looks like he reacted to a stick heading toward his face.

And this complaining about refs needs to stop. They're the best in the business. Many of us saw what happened when the NFL had to hire replacement referees. The job is more difficult that you could imagine.

 

[eviohh26]

Not embellishment but It's also not a penalty.

Teams should be able to veto a ref they don't want for the playoffs. Sutherland and Canucks have bad history that goes back 15 years.

 

[WhataKnight]

Part of this issue needs to be owned by commentators who will let that footage air, watch it as millions of others are, and try to sell that as evidence of an embellishment problem.

They could say Z didn’t deserve a penalty all day. I would hard agree with that. Looking at the footage, this would be an appropriate response. But to try and call this piddling thing a dive? The act like they never played Tim Stützle before. (Sorry, Sens fans.)

This is just noise.

Not embellishment but It's also not a penalty.

Teams should be able to veto a ref they don't want for the playoffs. Sutherland and Canucks have bad history that goes back 15 years.

I at least agree with the bolded. Veto lists would be a pretty slippery slope, though.

 

[HugeInTheShire]

To walk back the high sticking penalty and ensuing power play which materially affected the game at the time. That should be obvious.

So they'd be able to kill it off it was called a cross check or interference, but not if it's called high sticking?

This isn't a penalty that they'd look at and rescind, at best they'd change it to the correct call, cross checking.

 

[eviohh26]

Part of this issue needs to be owned by commentators who will let that footage air, watch it as millions of others are, and try to sell that as evidence of an embellishment problem.

They could say Z didn’t deserve a penalty all day. I would hard agree with that. Looking at the footage, this would be an appropriate response. But to try and call this piddling thing a dive? The act like they never played Tim Stützle before. (Sorry, Sens fans.)

This is just noise.



I at least agree with the bolded. Veto lists would be a pretty slippery slope, though.

Maybe . But it may make the league make the refs more accountable for their shitty reffing.

So they'd be able to kill it off it was called a cross check or interference, but not if it's called high sticking?

This isn't a penalty that they'd look at and rescind, at best they'd change it to the correct call, cross checking.

If you consider that crosschecking then you're going to have to call like 10 more of those each game. It was a nothing play.

 

[sting101]

Meh...

Looks like that's could be a borderline crosschecking call anyway.

Borderline crosscheck AKA do i like these guys. Is it time for a makeup call. i havent made a call in awhile time to throw the arm in the air and show them i'm in charge.

Ambiguous is the reason people get frustrated with this crap.

High sticks head contact and majors should be an easy gateway to do what they have in IAFF play. Review for 5 or 2 and if it wasn't and a player tries to sell it then give them an unsportsmanlike penalty.

Most importantly get the damn calls right. It's pretty explicit what is and what isn't and should be easy to finally move out of the caveman approach the NHL has adopted.

It's hard enough dealing with hooking interference slashing tripping calls for these guys.

 

[HugeInTheShire]

If you consider that crosschecking then you're going to have to call like 10 more of those each game. It was a nothing play.

Officials aren't going to negate a penalty, I get it, it wasn't a great call and hurt your team.
This doesn't mean they need to reinvent the wheel, in fact I'd say reviewing penalties would hurt Vancouver a lot more as they're known for falling pretty easily.

 

[eviohh26]

Officials aren't going to negate a penalty, I get it, it wasn't a great call and hurt your team.
This doesn't mean they need to reinvent the wheel, in fact I'd say reviewing penalties would hurt Vancouver a lot more as they're known for falling pretty easily.

I never advocated for reviewing penalties. But I do think refs should be held more accountable for bad games they have. They should have a yearly review on their performance with the league. Such as some companies do with employees .

Vancouver is known for falling down easily? Okay? I mean we do have Bambi on Ice . But he doesn't dive. Bit of a clown take.

 

[Ghetty Green]

Remember, this is the same player that two-hand tomahawk slashed Draisaitl in the playoffs last year.

Draisaital does that every playoffs lol

 

[TheDawnOfANewTage]

I don't consider that to be embellishment. If a stick gets pushed against my upper chest and starts riding up, I'm going to automatically throw my head back to try and avoid it. I'm not going to wait and see if it actually happens.

Got called out for somethin similar in beer league, stick clipped my collarbone and I went down like I got shot. Just an instinctual thing, I think, I saw what the dude was saying but I absolutely didn’t dive either, my body was like “nah that’s near your neck, bail!”

Anyways, I’m for reviewing every second of everything ever. With AI. From Mars. Don’t ask questions, just progress.

 

[easton117]

Meh I get why you’d want penalties to be reviewable. But the nfl tried it and it was tossed after one season.

And that tells you all you need to know about how it would go in the nhl

 

[GhostfaceWu]

No one is go to empathize with Vancouver when it comes to embellishing

 

[Kimota]

I remember when embelishment became a penaltiy in the early 00s, they were calling it all the time. But for whatever reasons, the refs stopped calling them. I don't know if their bosses told them to stop but they ain't calling 'em.

 

[Three On Zero]

No one is go to empathize with Vancouver when it comes to embellishing

It’s like when Edmonton fans complain about reffing, everyone knows the reffing is fine. They just don’t fall for the constant diving attempts

 

[Mattb124]

So they'd be able to kill it off it was called a cross check or interference, but not if it's called high sticking?

This isn't a penalty that they'd look at and rescind, at best they'd change it to the correct call, cross checking.

That wasn’t a cross check or interference. If the refs didn’t suspect head contact (high sticking) there would not have been a call - just like the commentators suggested.

 

[Golden_Jet]

I never advocated for reviewing penalties. But I do think refs should be held more accountable for bad games they have. They should have a yearly review on their performance with the league. Such as some companies do with employees .

Vancouver is known for falling down easily? Okay? I mean we do have Bambi on Ice . But he doesn't dive. Bit of a clown take.

They have reviews, and they get sent videos after each game, on things they thought needed discussing.

 

[Arthur Morgan]

.....just natural reaction to do that when something comes at ur face like that.

 

[Nucker101]

Hard to sympathize with Canuck fans with how many divers they have on their roster.





Kesler and Burrows are a disgrace.

 

[Alexander the Gr8]

I honestly dont blame players for continuing to embellish, much like Piterangelo did last night with a head snap back. Why should players stop when referees continuously still fall for it. Lol Zadorov gets 2 minutes for "high sticking"... LMAO referees have on ice view of these plays, literally 10 feet away.

When will the NHL change the rules so that coaches can challenge any penalty call. Failed challenge puts them down to 5 on 3. Win Win for the NHL, the call is correct and it leads to more goals, or it gets over-turned and the call gets fixed. win-win.

I hate challenges, last thing I want is for them to spend 2-5 min reviewing every f***ing infraction.

Goal challenges are already slowing down the pace of the game too much trying to determine if a player was 1 mm offside.