Did Byfield get away with a penalty on his ridiculous goal?

[Golden_Jet]

Especially when advantage is lost. Keep grasping.

How is poster going to grasp, when doesn’t understand what holding the stick (grasping) is.

 

[ORRFForever]

Here is the play in question.



Simple question - did the refs miss a holding the stick penalty on Byfield?

I'm sure they did but as you said in your question, I'm glad they did.

 

[GoldenBearHockey]

Especially when advantage is lost. Keep grasping.

Got it, what advantage did Wright lose in this play? He didn't battle, he didn't engage, he didn't try and get his stick back, so what advantage did he lose, if he wasn't in the play?

 

[nbwingsfan]

That's not what happened, but keep going, and 75-3, could care less, 90% of this forum have ZERO understanding of how the rule book actually works, they just bitch when their team loses over a call they don't understand.

Ah yes, everyone in here is an idiot except for you, that MUST be it.

And are you seriously denying he didn’t hold Wrights stick in the air? Even LA’s own social media addressed it

 

[Golden_Jet]

Ah yes, everyone in here is an idiot except for you, that MUST be it.

And are you seriously denying he didn’t hold Wrights stick in the air? Even LA’s own social media addressed it

I’m just here for the GoldenTearsHockey entertainment now.

 

[Mattb124]

Got it, what advantage did Wright lose in this play? He didn't battle, he didn't engage, he didn't try and get his stick back, so what advantage did he lose, if he wasn't in the play?

Where in the rule does it state that the defender must do those things in order for the stick hold to be a penalty?

Spoiler alert: it doesn’t.

 

[majormajor]

As I wrote in the thread - Byfield clearly grabs the stick, which warrants a penalty call.

But given the circumstances (most notably, Wright's soft play), I'm glad a penalty wasn't called.

And I fully admit I'd be salty if I was a Kraken fan (they're my second team). But I'm also pissed at Wright for the lack of effort. Had he fought harder, he might have gotten a call.

Yes Wright should have played him harder, but that all happened in a split second. It wasn't inattentive defense, just a bit soft the way young centers often are.

 

[Lazlo Hollyfeld]

It was created because in another thread, a poster went over the top insisting it was not a penalty, for holding the stick.

I should know better because it's hfboards, but it's insane someone would argue that isn't a penalty.

 

[dabeechman]

Checked the box score and didn't see a holding the stick penalty against Byfield.

Option C it is.

 

[Golden_Jet]

Checked the box score and didn't see a holding the stick penalty against Byfield.

Option C it is.

Why,
you‘re unable to watch the video and make your own determination, like everyone else has.
Looks like your vote is useless then lol, if you don’t watch the play.

 

[dabeechman]

Why,
you‘re unable to watch the video and make your own determination, like everyone else has.
Looks like your vote is useless then lol, if you don’t watch the play.

Yeah, my eyes don't work. I suffer from the same medical condition as most NHL officials.

 

[nbwingsfan]

Why,
you‘re unable to watch the video and make your own determination, like everyone else has.
Looks like your vote is useless then lol, if you don’t watch the play.

He’s right though. NHL refs have never made a bad call or missed a call ever. I have no idea why videos like this even exist!

 

[dabeechman]

Not only ruled that it was touched below the shoulders in real time, they also reviewed it in Toronto and determined it was below the shoulders. Subsequently Matthews scored the GWG few seconds later.

At the end of the day, why does it matter what my eyes see? Bad calls are made every game that lead to drama and controversy.

 

[GoldenBearHockey]

Ah yes, everyone in here is an idiot except for you, that MUST be it.

And are you seriously denying he didn’t hold Wrights stick in the air? Even LA’s own social media addressed it

Nope, I'm saying that he did, but it's NEVER BEEN CALLED that way as a penalty....not in that short of a time frame, not with the player not actively engaged.....

 

[GoldenBearHockey]

Where in the rule does it state that the defender must do those things in order for the stick hold to be a penalty?

Spoiler alert: it doesn’t.

Ok, so you DO WANT A STRICT RULE BOOK.....you said earlier you didn't, now you do...can you make up your mind.

 

[nbwingsfan]

Nope, I'm saying that he did, but it's NEVER BEEN CALLED that way as a penalty....not in that short of a time frame, not with the player not actively engaged.....

Every single time a player his holding another players stick and subsequently scores a goal it is called a penalty, unless it’s a horrible call. Such as this one.

But I’m sure you just simply know the rules better than everyone else on HF Boards, it’s gotta be that simple

 

[GoldenBearHockey]

Every single time a player his holding another players stick and subsequently scores a goal it is called a penalty, unless it’s a horrible call. Such as this one.

But I’m sure you just simply know the rules better than everyone else on HF Boards, it’s gotta be that simple

Every time? So where was Suzuki's call, in the original thread, they showed him holding the stick, scoring a goal....

Again, the rule has NEVER been applied the way you think it should be or want it to be, EVER.

 

[Mattb124]

Ok, so you DO WANT A STRICT RULE BOOK.....you said earlier you didn't, now you do...can you make up your mind.

Speaking of making things up, you can read my previous post because it was absolutely clear despite your misrepresentations.

 

[Boyon90]

two minute penalty and a letter of apology to wright for making him look like a little baby

 

[King'sPawn]

I think the general point is that by definition, Byf8eld held Wright's stick which is a penalty. However, refs let a lot of things go (right or wrong), and this was one of those times the Kings got away with one.

Because we know not every trip, slash, hook, or crosscheck gets called. Refs use their judgment.

I still think the biggest factor was Wright letting himself be bullied. It's like when someone dives during a trip. Yes, a trip occurred, but if you're just going to stop moving your feet, the call may not go your way.

 

[GoldenBearHockey]

I think the general point is that by definition, Byf8eld held Wright's stick which is a penalty. However, refs let a lot of things go (right or wrong), and this was one of those times the Kings got away with one.

Because we know not every trip, slash, hook, or crosscheck gets called. Refs use their judgment.

I still think the biggest factor was Wright letting himself be bullied. It's like when someone dives during a trip. Yes, a trip occurred, but if you're just going to stop moving your feet, the call may not go your way.

This is it exactly, but too many f***ing cry babies in here won't acknowledge that....

I said it from the beginning if Wright shows up, if he engages, if he tries to get his stick back, if he does anything but stand there with his dick in his hand, he probably gets the call, or at the very least, there's a GREAT argument for a missed call.

He does NONE of that.....and holding the stick, has NEVER EVER EVER BEEN CALLED in a passive way, there's always some fight to get it back, something.....but no one here will let facts get in the way...so there is that.

 

[GoldenBearHockey]

Speaking of making things up, you can read my previous post because it was absolutely clear despite your misrepresentations.

Making things up? I initially said, by your initial response, you clearly don't want things called literal, you want them called when an advantage is lost, you said, especially when an advantage is lost, that's an agreement on my observation.

Then I respond what advantage did Wright lose, and you respond with, well where does it say in the rulebook, which is completely AGAINST what you initially said...

So which is it, do you want it called in the most literal sense possible, or do you want penalties called when an advantage is gained or lost?

 

[King'sPawn]

This is it exactly, but too many f***ing cry babies in here won't acknowledge that....

I said it from the beginning if Wright shows up, if he engages, if he tries to get his stick back, if he does anything but stand there with his dick in his hand, he probably gets the call, or at the very least, there's a GREAT argument for a missed call.

He does NONE of that.....and holding the stick, has NEVER EVER EVER BEEN CALLED in a passive way, there's always some fight to get it back, something.....but no one here will let facts get in the way...so there is that.

I don't know what they're supposed to acknowledge. The issue is you're arguing it's not a penalty.

The ref could have called a penalty if he followed the rulebook. Either because of circumstances or because neither saw the play in real time, a penalty wasn't called.

To say it's not a penalty is simply untrue. You can argue the ref used judgment not to call a penalty, but from what I've read, it looks like most are taking umbrage over your insistence it's not a penalty, because "not every penalty is called." That doesn't mean it wasn't a penalty.