Penalty shot call in the Leafs-Isles Game

On-the-Fly

Registered User
Feb 6, 2007
2,149
953
This is from the NHL rulebook , 57.3 Penalty Shot, someone please point out if this is inaccurate:


[/LIST]

Condition 3 was not met. Blown call. Replay shows it clear as day. The (flubbed) shot got off fine. No chance was prevented.
 

Leaf handler

Registered User
Mar 12, 2016
181
11
Do the refs ever have to answer for absolutely ridiculous things like this? I mean sometimes you can make the case either way but this is pretty funny
 

aufheben

#Norris4Fox
Jan 31, 2013
53,720
27,481
New Jersey
Condition 3 was not met. Blown call. Replay shows it clear as day. The (flubbed) shot got off fine. No chance was prevented.
"The fact that the player got a shot off does not automatically eliminate this play from the penalty shot consideration criteria. If the foul was from behind and the player was denied a “more” reasonable scoring opportunity due to the foul, then the penalty shot should still be awarded."

If Hunwick didn't actually make contact, then that's just bad luck for the Leafs.

Awful call, but more often than not the refs will call as soon as they see the stick in the hands. Hardly new.
Basically.
 

arrbez

bad chi
Jun 2, 2004
13,352
261
Toronto
Awful call, but more often than not the refs will call as soon as they see the stick in the hands. Hardly new.

There was no stick in the hands though. He may not have made contact at all, that's what makes it so mindblowing. Hunwick basically said "I'm trash, I give up, just take the shot", and he still got dinged for a penalty.

 

On-the-Fly

Registered User
Feb 6, 2007
2,149
953
"The fact that the player got a shot off does not automatically eliminate this play from the penalty shot consideration criteria. If the foul was from behind and the player was denied a “more†reasonable scoring opportunity due to the foul, then the penalty shot should still be awarded."

If Hunwick didn't actually make contact, then that's just bad luck for the Leafs.

Bad luck indeed. And mistake on Morton.

Definition of blown call right there.
 

swimmer77

More PIM's than Points
Jun 22, 2010
6,674
2,140
in water
Babcock was mad, Weight would have been mad. Not the worse call ever. And the talking heads took full advantage after the Leafs totally and embarrassingly blew a three on one which they never mentioned during their intermission tirade. LOL

Leafs won and overcame some adversity after constantly blowing leads. They should be thanking that ref for giving them the opportunity to clear that hurdle.

Stick parallel to the ice from behind with that motion adds fuel. Can't tell if contact was made or not. Why was Chimera's shot weak? IDK Maybe a weak call but gutsy in that toxic environment. LOL
 

Smartguy

Registered User
May 3, 2010
4,000
3,247
Edmonton
Came in here expecting a blatant proper call being that it was a leafs thread, but indeed that is a legit crap call. In what world does a ref rationalize that as a penalty shot?
 

aufheben

#Norris4Fox
Jan 31, 2013
53,720
27,481
New Jersey
Also calling conditions 1 and 2 not met.

No infraction was present.


Blown badly.
Not saying he got it right, I'm outlining the possible justification for it, since people seem to think it was a conspiracy, completely unfounded, worst call in hockey history, etc. Even with all the replays in this thread from different angles, there's still some uncertainty towards whether or not contact was made.
 

Leafs87

Mr. Steal Your Job
Aug 10, 2010
14,806
4,897
Toronto
Worst part is Nylander later on had a play where it was more of a penalty shot worthy play. Still I wouldn't call either but when you make that call earlier then not this it just doesn't make sense
 

On-the-Fly

Registered User
Feb 6, 2007
2,149
953
Not saying he got it right, I'm outlining the possible justification for it, since people seem to think it was a conspiracy or completely unfounded, or the worst call in hockey history. Even with all the replays in this thread from different angles, there's still some ambivalence towards whether or not contact was made.

Appreciated.

Either it meets criteria or it doesnt. Binary in a sense. This one fails 3 of 4. There is no justification. Its a mistake. Human error.
 

aufheben

#Norris4Fox
Jan 31, 2013
53,720
27,481
New Jersey
Appreciated.

Either it meets criteria or it doesnt. Binary in a sense. This one fails 3 of 4. There is no justification. Its a mistake. Human error.
Not mutually exclusive. This is right before Chimera takes his shot, (which was weak), from the nearest vantage point to the ref's out of the videos shared in this thread:

e9r9Dps.png


If there was no contact, and Chimera simply shot poorly by himself, well, like you said, human error.
 

swimmer77

More PIM's than Points
Jun 22, 2010
6,674
2,140
in water
Not mutually exclusive. This is right before Chimera takes his shot, (which was weak), from the nearest vantage point to the ref's out of the videos shared in this thread:

e9r9Dps.png


If there was no contact, and Chimera simply shot poorly by himself, well, like you said, human error.

Good shot of what would be the ref's perspective I'm guessing and the guy that had to make the call in a split second. But the talking heads said it was the worse call ever so it must have been.
 

heretik27

Registered User
Apr 18, 2013
8,982
6,342
Winnipeg
Trouba was in the same situation and went stick on stick (you could hear the wood tap) a week or two ago and they called a penalty shot there too. This one's even worse though, holy crap what an absolute beyond garbage call.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad