Stutzle goal called off due to “interference”

[Knave]

Stutzle's stick remains on the ice to receive a pass on that play. This idea that was a deliberate attempt by him to take the stick out of the Carolina player's hands is ridiculous.

It was a blown call. Period. Just like at the end of that same period Pinto slashed the ice and thin air and that was 2 minutes. Another blown call. But apparently a Carolina player can repeatedly punch our player in the head while he's prone on the ice and that's not roughing.

The worst officiated game I have ever seen.

 

[tarheelhockey]

Should have been a 1-1 game and then who knows? Canes goalie was having a night for sure but it was a 3 goal swing caused by the horrific calls by Brenk and Markovic. Hard to make that up in a tight game.

In fairness to the officials, 2 of those 3 goals were the result of the Sens making a mindless shorthanded line change. If not for that, they had the penalty killed and it’s still 1–1.

 

[benfranklin]

As a Leaf fan this was worse than McDavid flicking away Tavares stick on the ice and setting up the game tying goal.

That shouldve been a penalty also. Baaaad look having two of these in one night go in different directions.

 

[SpezDispenser]

True to my word, I'm drunk. f*** it all

 

[Sensatauro]

#justiceforstutzle

 

[BlueDream]

Yawn. I’ve seen a thousand calls worse than that.

 

[Oddbob]

You need a slahsing motion to slash someone’s stick oit of there hand. Should players just drop their sticks now when they’re near someone shooting?

He still made the guy lose his stick even if it was a weak. You aren't allowed to knock someones stick out of their hands.

 

[Meuracas]

https://x.com/i/web/status/1857958988685414833

I don't understand how the ref calls this interference on Stutzle...

”Knocking the d**k of Svechnikov out of his hands”

If true, I understand the no-goal call.

 

[Agent Zuuuub]

If it is a stick lift violent enough to send a stick flying when the puck is nowhere near either of them, then yes that is the definition of interference.

Same with putting your stick over another and holding it there. Ive personally seen both called for and against me.


That is not a natural "swing" for any NHL player who has a tap in. He puts his stick down aggressively on top of the shaft and holds it there so he couldnt lift his stick.

Thank you for posting a good video of it. It is even more clear it was interference now.

you realize you're allowed to stick check someones stick right?

like that's 90 percent the game of hockey, happens all the time in the corners, in faceoffs, in front of the net. they were both battling for the puck and for positioning for their sticks, your allowed to make contact with another stick in a battle.

the canes player was just reaching though so obviously had a weak grip on his stick. but why is that stutzles problem?

if that's interreferences, a call would be made every 10 seconds in hockey and games would last 7 hours.

 

[ijuka]

If it is a stick lift violent enough to send a stick flying when the puck is nowhere near either of them, then yes that is the definition of interference.

Same with putting your stick over another and holding it there. Ive personally seen both called for and against me.


That is not a natural "swing" for any NHL player who has a tap in. He puts his stick down aggressively on top of the shaft and holds it there so he couldnt lift his stick.

Thank you for posting a good video of it. It is even more clear it was interference now.

? He didn't even know Svechnikov had stuck his stick out when he did it, and he wasn't looking at Svechnikov at all.

Putting his stick down steadily so that it can't easily get lifted is not interference, and this is not a slash.

He still made the guy lose his stick even if it was a weak. You aren't allowed to knock someones stick out of their hands.

Letting go of your stick when it gets tapped isn't the same thing as getting it knocked off your hands.

 

[Albatros]

Leave refereeing to the IIHF.

 

[Oddbob]

? He didn't even know Svechnikov had stuck his stick out when he did it, and he wasn't looking at Svechnikov at all.

Putting his stick down steadily so that it can't easily get lifted is not interference, and this is not a slash.


Letting go of your stick when it gets tapped isn't the same thing as getting it knocked off your hands.

Why attempt it though? You aren't allowed to if you do it hard enough anyhow, so why try?

 

[GeeoffBrown]

I think they made that call because the Canes player sold it

 

[Kegu]

In fairness to the officials, 2 of those 3 goals were the result of the Sens making a mindless shorthanded line change. If not for that, they had the penalty killed and it’s still 1–1.

In fairness to the officials? The only reason the Sens were in a position to make a "mindless shorthanded line change" was because the officials decided to penalize Pinto for slashing the ice.

 

[Heffyhoof]

Were these the same refs that gave Xhekaj the only penalty when two opposing players dropped their gloves and one of them sucker punched him from behind?

 

[WhatTheDuck]

Bizarre call for sure

 

[LuckyPierre]

The fundamental issue is that it’s not just a blown call.

It’s a blown penalty call, yes.

It’s also a non reviewable disallowed goal call at the same time.

The official ought to be absolutely certain his call is the correct one to proceed. In this case, it is clear that the ‘infraction’ does not warrant both a non reviewable no goal call, as well as a penalty.

It was a strong scoring play by a forward who had gained positional advantage. Mind numbing that Toronto couldn’t call in and overrule.

 

[LuckyPierre]

In fairness to the officials, 2 of those 3 goals were the result of the Sens making a mindless shorthanded line change. If not for that, they had the penalty killed and it’s still 1–1.

1-1?

You mean 1-0, because Stutzle’s goal was wiped out. Which is still insane to me.

And the next penalty Ottawa had to kill following the Stutzle kill was Pinto’s absolute phantom slash.

The mindless change during said PK that led to a 5 on 3 was a clear penalty, no question. But they aren’t in that situation if the officials weren’t hallucinating on the Pinto call in the first place.

There is objective cause and effect at play here that takes this game from a 1-1 tie to a 3-0 Carolina lead, on account of a string of all-time poor officiating calls.

 

[LPHabsFan]

People don't understand rules or context, breaking news at 11.

 

[LEAFANFORLIFE23]

Idk, did you hear Kenzie Lalonde during the Leafs Sens game?

Sure did.

 

[ijuka]

Then there was the Pinto slashing call because he hit the ice 5 feet away from any Cane, and also an objectively incorrect call where they didn't remove the power play after the Aho goal. The goal was 2 minutes after the penalty, which means the goal was scored after the penalty expired, which means the Canes had no more power play. So they conjured up the following 2 minute power play out of thin air.

So 3 penalties were just terrible, along with the one goal that was taken back. Who knows how the game would have ended had the game been 2-1 instead of 3-0?

And the worst thing is, there are no repercussions and the refs have infinite job security. In most jobs, if you are awful at your job, you get fired. Here, not so much. Instead, you fine anyone who dares question the completely awful refereeing.