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

[WhiskeyYerTheDevils]

Here is the play in question.



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

 

[Coffee]

Not picking sides here but how about tag the guy who provoked this thread in the first place. It's good to hear both sides

@GoldenBearHockey

 

[King'sPawn]

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.

 

[Raccoon Jesus]

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.

I wouldn't

Like i said in the main thread i'd be pissed at the King for being so out of position and aloof

You're never going to get that call when youre two feet away on the wrong side of the play and not even paying attention much less even exerting the minimal possible effort to control your body or stick

 

[Habs7631]

A little of A, a little of B.

Definitely a penalty, shouldn’t have counted, but glad it did. Sick goal.

 

[The Macho King]

Rule of cool applies.

 

[Filthy Dangles]

Not the best poll.

There's a ton overlap between A and B.

 

[Coffee]

Not the best poll.

There's a ton overlap between A and B.

An old timer like Whiskey get's a pass I think. And if not, then what have we come to?

 

[WhiskeyYerTheDevils]

Not the best poll.

There's a ton overlap between A and B.

Polls don't have to be mutually exclusive.

Select the response that best describes how you feel.

 

[AlwaysSunnyInDetroit]

it depends on whether the red wings trade for him or not. if they do, totally fair, i didn't see anything. if they don't, he's a bigger scumbag than marchand and deserves to be castrated

 

[Fledgemyhedge]

faith restored

 

[Coffee]

Polls don't have to be mutually exclusive.

Select the response that best describes how you feel.

Usually when someone gets technical with Filthy Dangles, it does not end in their favour. But I think you make a strong case here.

 

[Jericho111091]

Probably should've been a penalty but it was sick so I'm glad it counted

 

[AvroArrow]

Not the best poll.

There's a ton overlap between A and B.

Probably because grabbing the opponents stick is a penalty ? There's literally no argument against it lol clear as day grabs his stick

The goal was still insane, the hand eye coordination to do that with 1 hand while battling in front of the net but absolutely a penalty and it should have been called.

 

[GoldenBearHockey]

Probably because grabbing the opponents stick is a penalty ? There's literally no argument against it lol clear as day grabs his stick

The goal was still insane, the hand eye coordination to do that with 1 hand while battling in front of the net but absolutely a penalty and it should have been called.

Here;s the problem, it's also a penalty to "cross check" a player, but there are literally a 100 a game, that do not get called, because it doesn't rise to the level of a penalty.

Those arguing that it's a penalty, are taking the rule book by it's literal sense, and wanting it applied that way, when you do that, you will see games 3 on 3 in perpetuity the amount of penalties that should be called, which is why, it's not called that way.

 

[AvroArrow]

Here;s the problem, it's also a penalty to "cross check" a player, but there are literally a 100 a game, that do not get called, because it doesn't rise to the level of a penalty.

Those arguing that it's a penalty, are taking the rule book by it's literal sense, and wanting it applied that way, when you do that, you will see games 3 on 3 in perpetuity the amount of penalties that should be called, which is why, it's not called that way.

Yes I want the rule book applied by the literal sense. Grabbing a defending players stick, directly resulting in a goal is stupid.

By the cross-check logic, would you like to see 100 instances a game of guys grabbing the opposing players stick ? Probably not I would guess.

I think what we would actually see is hockey and less dirty/illegal plays. Bad players that stay relevant by cross-checking and doing nothing else to clear the crease wouldn't be around.

I'm all for physicality but within the rules, doesn't make sense to let a guy grab someones stick to score a goal.

 

[Rhaegar Targaryen]

By definition of the rules, absolutely.

 

[Hunter368]

Often there is a potential pen missed on the play leading up to a goal, not exactly rare. That doesn’t change the fact or skill taken to score that goal by Byfield. Amazing goal and I’m not a Kings fan or even a Byfield fan. What he did was crazy good & skilled

 

[AD1066]

Yes, but it was negated by the "rule of cool".

 

[Mattb124]

I once was serving jury duty and a woman in our pool told the judge that she would lie to herself to find the defendant not guilty because she could not live with the guilt of sending someone to prison - even if she believed they were guilty. This poll feels a lot like that. Anyone with an understanding of the rule knows it was a penalty and the goal should have been waived off, but many are digging for a rationalization as to why not.

 

[Hippasus]

I once was serving jury duty and a woman in our pool told the judge that she would lie to herself to find the defendant not guilty because she could not live with the guilt of sending someone to prison - even if she believed they were guilty. This poll feels a lot like that. Anyone with an understanding of the rule knows it was a penalty and the goal should have been waived off, but many are digging for a rationalization as to why not.

Interesting analogy. Couldn't she still get dismissed late in the game by saying that? If so that would be like the mods nullifying a lot of the votes for one side of the poll, which itself seems absurd in a free for any rationalization poll. So I suppose the analogy breaks down.

 

[Mattb124]

Here;s the problem, it's also a penalty to "cross check" a player, but there are literally a 100 a game, that do not get called, because it doesn't rise to the level of a penalty.

Those arguing that it's a penalty, are taking the rule book by it's literal sense, and wanting it applied that way, when you do that, you will see games 3 on 3 in perpetuity the amount of penalties that should be called, which is why, it's not called that way.

Every time I have seen a cross check in front of the net that created space and a goal was scored immediately thereafter as a result, the goal was called off. The same logic should have been applied in this situation.

 

[Mattb124]

Interesting analogy. Couldn't she still get dismissed late in the game by saying that? If so that would be like the mods nullifying a lot of the votes for one side of the poll, which itself seems absurd in a free for any rationalization poll. So I suppose the analogy breaks down.

Way to completely missed the point.

 

[Fire Sweeney]

How soft do you have to be to lose your stick on a play like that ?

 

[wetcoast]

Here is the play in question.



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

It's April and everyone is gearing up for playoff hockey.