The Call

[CCook37]

Hawks fan in peace, that was absolute shit. im still floored.

 

[Einzakin]

I just saw the replay after watching the game.

What an absolutely brutal call. I can't believe a ref has the audacity to call that shit.

Garbage. As a Leaf fan I was rooting for you guys. Oh well. VGK will win it next year.

 

[Veritas0Aequitas]

Avs fan here. Also a ref most of my life. Not sure how that's a 5. I can see 2 for cross-checking but nothing more. I can't see that there's anything flagrant enough to warrant a major there.

 

[HanSolo]

Cool.

 

[mundyc3]

Avs fan here. Also a ref most of my life. Not sure how that's a 5. I can see 2 for cross-checking but nothing more. I can't see that there's anything flagrant enough to warrant a major there.

As a ref, I must ask what you and your counterparts do in the situation of not seeing how an injury like this occur. Do you see them being trigger happy with a major or believe they should only call exactly what they were able to see? That is the part that is so baffling to me, so I hope you could shed some light on that from your perspective

 

[Veritas0Aequitas]

As a ref, I must ask what you and your counterparts do in the situation of not seeing how an injury like this occur. Do you see them being trigger happy with a major or believe they should only call exactly what they were able to see? That is the part that is so baffling to me, so I hope you could shed some light on that from your perspective

I think what they saw is someone injured as a result of a crosscheck. Which, if you boil it down, is a major penalty in many hockey rulebooks.

However, in the NHL just because someone is injured due to committing a penalty doesn't automatically mean the penalty goes from minor to major. For example, the TJ Oshie hit from a few games ago is one that comes to mind immediately. From every call I've ever seen made it's more based on the severity of the penalty. Was the crosscheck vicious enough that it deserves a major? Was it a light crosscheck in the back where a player was a few feet from the boards in a vulnerable position and could be seriously injured or killed? Both of those could be majors. A moderately hard crosscheck in open ice combined with a player off balance is generally a minor. That wasn't flagrant, it was more just a minor penalty combined with bad luck. In youth hockey though, that's probably a major. A player injured as a result of a minor penalty is always a major. There's more wiggle room as you go up in the ranks obviously due to skill and strength of the athletes.

Pavelski took a moderately hard crosscheck and lost his balance and Stastny might have taken advantage of a player in a vulnerable position, but also might have inadvertently run into Pavelski. That's a split second thing that happened in a fast paced game. Flagrant and attempt to injure? Not from what I can tell. If they're calling it a major on Eakin due to injury from a minor crosschecking penalty then that's the only thing that makes sense to me.

Does that help at all?

 

[hangman005]

So many visitors from other fan bases. Welcome.

I baked some scones.

 

[mundyc3]

I think what they saw is someone injured as a result of a crosscheck. Which, if you boil it down, is a major penalty in many hockey rulebooks.

However, in the NHL just because someone is injured due to committing a penalty doesn't automatically mean the penalty goes from minor to major. For example, the TJ Oshie hit from a few games ago is one that comes to mind immediately. From every call I've ever seen made it's more based on the severity of the penalty. Was the crosscheck vicious enough that it deserves a major? Was it a light crosscheck in the back where a player was a few feet from the boards in a vulnerable position and could be seriously injured or killed? Both of those could be majors. A moderately hard crosscheck in open ice combined with a player off balance is generally a minor. That wasn't flagrant, it was more just a minor penalty combined with bad luck. In youth hockey though, that's probably a major. A player injured as a result of a minor penalty is always a major. There's more wiggle room as you go up in the ranks obviously due to skill and strength of the athletes.

Pavelski took a moderately hard crosscheck and lost his balance and Stastny might have taken advantage of a player in a vulnerable position, but also might have inadvertently run into Pavelski. That's a split second thing that happened in a fast paced game. Flagrant and attempt to injure? Not from what I can tell. If they're calling it a major on Eakin due to injury from a minor crosschecking penalty then that's the only thing that makes sense to me.

Does that help at all?

Thank you, I appreciate your input. The thing that really muddies this up is that Gallant says he was told that this was a high stick to the head. If that is the case, this was purely judged by the injury. Like seeing someone with a black eye and assuming they got hit, immediately calling the authorities. Just because it looks like something after doesn't mean it is. Making assumptions on such a call is a bad look.

 

[hangman005]

Thank you, I appreciate your input. The thing that really muddies this up is that Gallant says he was told that this was a high stick to the head. If that is the case, this was purely judged by the injury. Like seeing someone with a black eye and assuming they got hit, immediately calling the authorities. Just because it looks like something after doesn't mean it is. Making assumptions on such a call is a bad look.

I haven't reffed hockey, hell I can barely skate lol, but have reffed a few other sports. for many many a year. In fact I was considered one of the fairest refs there was, I probably could have made it far had I lived in a urban center, but living in a rural province, there wasn't enough oppourtunity for advancement. Like the National Referee supervisors said I was reffing at about level 3, which is Nationals, I think 4 is International level. But was only at level 1, because I was unable to do the required course, because none happened remotely close to me, hell it took about 4 years to get to the level 1 course.

But I don't think I have once called a penalty I did not witness, I could have the team on and off the field and the crowd screaming at me, but I refuse to call what I can't see, nor did I call anything after the fact, if I wasn't calling a penalty when it happened, I wasn't calling it... Well unless I was on the ground after getting steamrolled for being out of position lol. Every indication here, is they did not see what happened and penalized the result. Which is unacceptable, I think even at the lower level tournaments I reffed, I'd probably be sat for a couple of games, for a call such as that. I definately wouldn't be selected to ref the finals, or semi finals.

 

[HanSolo]

I haven't reffed hockey, hell I can barely skate lol, but have reffed a few other sports. for many many a year. In fact I was considered one of the fairest refs there was, I probably could have made it far had I lived in a urban center, but living in a rural province, there wasn't enough oppourtunity for advancement. Like the National Referee supervisors said I was reffing at about level 3, which is Nationals, I think 4 is International level. But was only at level 1, because I was unable to do the required course, because none happened remotely close to me, hell it took about 4 years to get to the level 1 course.

But I don't think I have once called a penalty I did not witness, I could have the team on and off the field and the crowd screaming at me, but I refuse to call what I can't see, nor did I call anything after the fact, if I wasn't calling a penalty when it happened, I wasn't calling it... Well unless I was on the ground after getting steamrolled for being out of position lol. Every indication here, is they did not see what happened and penalized the result. Which is unacceptable, I think even at the lower level tournaments I reffed, I'd probably be sat for a couple of games, for a call such as that. I definately wouldn't be selected to ref the finals, or semi finals.

I mean if what Gallant said is true and the refs claimed Eakin crosschecked Pavelski in the face, then this truly is the most bungled call I've ever seen. Rulebook discretion is one thing, not seeing the act is another, but not seeing and LYING about what happened is a travesty plain and simple.

 

[The Duck Knight]

Hell even if we imagine we're in lala land and Eakin did cross check him in the head, Pavelski is wearing a full shield. How does that result in him bleeding from the back of his head.

 

[HanSolo]

Lol. I'm not gonna go back to the main board to restir the pot but I can't sleep and came across this:



Sharks fans acting like this should've been an automatic call because of injury on the play when it's discretionary based on the severity of the hit. Had the refs actually f***ing seen what happened they'd know that wasn't a severe hit. Just a severe result. Bad call. With the rule here without editorializing by main boards posters, nothing is gonna change my mind about that.

 

[hangman005]

I mean if what Gallant said is true and the refs claimed Eakin crosschecked Pavelski in the face, then this truly is the most bungled call I've ever seen. Rulebook discretion is one thing, not seeing the act is another, but not seeing and LYING about what happened is a travesty plain and simple.

Yeah, the jokes (or were they serious) about Eakin getting suspended. Is it somewhat shocking that it wouldn't be a surprise if the NHL doubled down on stupid and tried to suspend him.

But everything I've seen and heard, tells me these officials should not officiate another playoff game this year. I'd (in my rage) want more and to fire them into the sun despite the protests of their union. But the horrendously blew a call in the worst way, at the worst time with the worst result and that is just unacceptable. Almost wish Turk completely roasted them, damn the fine... almost.

 

[HanSolo]

The shittiest part of all this is I had a dream last night that we'd go up 2-0 in this game and then a couple bad penalties would lead us to go into OT 2-2. Difference being that we scored in OT.

 

[Mogo]

Awful call but you should blame that horrible PK for the loss.

 

[HanSolo]

Awful call but you should blame that horrible PK for the loss.

Or we could recognize that both played a major role.

 

[The Duck Knight]

Or we could recognize that both played a major role.

100% correct. Problem is all the deflectors refuse to acknowledge that without the monumentally bad call the Knights PK doesn't have a chance to blow it.

 

[HanSolo]

100% correct. Problem is all the deflectors refuse to acknowledge that without the monumentally bad call the Knights PK doesn't have a chance to blow it.

Exactly. It's like what Marchesseault said. They score on a two minute fine. They still have ten minutes still up by two to settle the game down. Sharks were flying in response to blood coming out of Pavelski's head and the opportunity to tie. Knights were shellshocked.

Having a fifth man on the ice after a 2 minute failed PK might have helped keep the scoring surge down.

Yes our PK f***ing up is just as much to blame as the call itself but one doesn't happen without the other. It's f***ing me up a wall that the refs supposedly blew Game 2 when the Sharks were only down by one as a result, and it's referee gamesmanship to do the two goal swing because the Sharks were not able to get back in the game mentally, but nothing about Vegas' psychology matters in this equation.

 

[The Duck Knight]

Exactly. It's like what Marchesseault said. They score on a two minute fine. They still have ten minutes still up by two to settle the game down. Sharks were flying in response to blood coming out of Pavelski's head and the opportunity to tie. Knights were shellshocked.

Having a fifth man on the ice after a 2 minute failed PK might have helped keep the scoring surge down.

Yes our PK ****ing up is just as much to blame as the call itself but one doesn't happen without the other. It's ****ing me up a wall that the refs supposedly blew Game 2 when the Sharks were only down by one as a result, and it's referee gamesmanship to do the two goal swing because the Sharks were not able to get back in the game mentally, but nothing about Vegas' psychology matters in this equation.

Don't you realize 1+1 = 4? It's simple Sharks math. Can't even sleep I'm so f***ing peeved with the dipshittery on display.

 

[HanSolo]

Don't you realize 1+1 = 4? It's simple Sharks math. Can't even sleep I'm so ****ing peeved with the dip****tery on display.

Yeah I haven't been able to sleep either. My brain is f***ing wired right now. Today is gonna suck.

 

[TeamRenzo]

That was embarrassingly bad.

 

[Agalloch]

Just kill the penalty.

 

[egelband]

You guys are taking this extremely well. My hat's off to you all.

 

[Vegas07]

You guys are taking this extremely well. My hat's off to you all.

I think I’ve been in shock. Sounds weird but I felt more upset about the game 6 loss. I was really frustrated after that loss and for the first time felt we had a better than 50/50 chance to lose this series.

After this loss I’m still trying to grasp the fact that this actually happened.

With the exception of the horrific penalty kill I was really proud of the way the team played. I can’t believe we let them score in 6 seconds though. Wtf? That only added to the shock.

 

[theslatcher]

That was a 5.

For something that never happened? Ok.