Quote:
Originally Posted by Mattman
I'm just curious to the opinion here, especially on the topic of how refs are justifying what's a penalty and for what reason it may be a penalty.
This just happened to Couture in the LA vs Sharks game. I would say a clean hit from Jeff Carter, but just a bad angle and rough outcome for Couture.
How in the hell is this called high sticking???
How does a ref justify a penalty for that after the play had been made and nothing was called or maybe seen initially?
Mind boggling to try and understand how strange the officiating of the NHL has become in the last few years.
|
The ref put his arm up and blew the whistle right away. He called it high sticking because from his angle it looked like a butt end to the face. Multi-angle slow motion replay shows that maybe the stick didn't catch him at all, but the ref doesn't have that luxury in real time. Also, the penalty was not reviewable as it was only a minor.