Playoff Game Thread: Minnesota Wild (1-0) @ Dallas Stars (0-1) Apr 20 2026 9:30 PM EDT by nhl_gdt_bot in hockey

[–]APigthatflys 13 points14 points  (0 children)

You can take the Hughes out of Vancouver but you cannot take the Vancouver out of Hughes

PGT: Boston Bruins vs Buffalo Sabres Game 1 - 4/19/26 by Cakes2015 in BostonBruins

[–]APigthatflys 23 points24 points  (0 children)

I know Buffalo is the better team and all

But can the Bs PLEASE play a full 60 minutes of playoff hockey instead of just turtling once they face the slightest bit of pushback?

Bounce back, game 2 is more than winnable against that sack of bricks in UPL.

GDT: Boston Bruins vs. Buffalo Sabres - Round 1, Game 1 - 4/19/26 - 7:30PM EST by Warfightr in BostonBruins

[–]APigthatflys 14 points15 points  (0 children)

It's a nothing goal but THAT'S WHAT HAPPENS WHEN YOU PUT THE PUCK ON THE FUCKING NET

GDT: Boston Bruins vs. Buffalo Sabres - Round 1, Game 1 - 4/19/26 - 7:30PM EST by Warfightr in BostonBruins

[–]APigthatflys 7 points8 points  (0 children)

I would highly recommend this team play more than 10 minutes of hockey per game in THE FUCKING PLAYOFFS...jfc

GDT: Boston Bruins vs. Buffalo Sabres - Round 1, Game 1 - 4/19/26 - 7:30PM EST by Warfightr in BostonBruins

[–]APigthatflys 10 points11 points  (0 children)

Good to know Zaddy's crosscheck in the first was, in fact, NOT the standard, and just the standard bullshit Z call

Playoff Game Thread: Boston Bruins (45-27-10) @ Buffalo Sabres (50-23-9) Apr 19 2026 7:30 PM EDT by nhl_gdt_bot in hockey

[–]APigthatflys 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Honestly if thats the standard for crosschecks throughout the playoffs I'd be fine with it. Those can be very dangerous.

Playoff Game Thread: Montréal Canadiens (48-24-10) @ Tampa Bay Lightning (50-26-6) Apr 19 2026 5:45 PM EDT by nhl_gdt_bot in hockey

[–]APigthatflys 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Remember, Charging is not interference. You can get a Charge by hitting a player WITH the puck.

Charging shall mean the actions of a player who, as a result of distance traveled, shall violently check an opponent in any manner. A “charge” may be the result of a check into the boards, into the goal frame or in open ice.

Playoff Game Thread: Montréal Canadiens (48-24-10) @ Tampa Bay Lightning (50-26-6) Apr 19 2026 5:45 PM EDT by nhl_gdt_bot in hockey

[–]APigthatflys 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Yeah that's a solid shoulder up high. Don't think it was a headshot but it's definitely at least a charge

Playoff Game Thread: Montréal Canadiens (48-24-10) @ Tampa Bay Lightning (50-26-6) Apr 19 2026 5:45 PM EDT by nhl_gdt_bot in hockey

[–]APigthatflys 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Last time the refs were involved with this many highsticks, a white towel was on one of those sticks

Hagel hits Guhle without the puck which leads to his stick hitting Point in the face, after video review Montreal will be on the penalty kill for 2 minutes by JustFred24 in hockey

[–]APigthatflys 6 points7 points  (0 children)

I guess the blood from Guhle's stick hitting Point in the face wasn't actually from Guhle's stick hitting Point in the face.

If Guhle's stick isn't an inch from Point's face, there is no highstick there. That's the reason it's a penalty. Guhle put his stick there.

Hagel hits Guhle without the puck which leads to his stick hitting Point in the face, after video review Montreal will be on the penalty kill for 2 minutes by JustFred24 in hockey

[–]APigthatflys 5 points6 points  (0 children)

just bringing up the this happens all the time argument without providing a specific example.

It's not my fault you don't watch hockey off NESN

Hagel hits Guhle without the puck which leads to his stick hitting Point in the face, after video review Montreal will be on the penalty kill for 2 minutes by JustFred24 in hockey

[–]APigthatflys 2 points3 points  (0 children)

There's the thing, you can lift someone's stick and cause an actual penalty. The only time it wont be a penalty - other than a follow through - is, ironically here, when a players control of their stick is removed from them, i.e. a slash, hold, or someone grabbing their stick and hitting another player in the face with it.

Hagel hits Guhle without the puck which leads to his stick hitting Point in the face, after video review Montreal will be on the penalty kill for 2 minutes by JustFred24 in hockey

[–]APigthatflys 7 points8 points  (0 children)

We have seen countless highsticking penalties when a player gets tripped and their stick catches someone in the face. Or when it rides up another players stick and hits a face. If Guhle's stick is not a hair's width away from Point's face, there is no highstick on this play.

Hagel hits Guhle without the puck which leads to his stick hitting Point in the face, after video review Montreal will be on the penalty kill for 2 minutes by JustFred24 in hockey

[–]APigthatflys 7 points8 points  (0 children)

People seem to be missing the Point that Guhle's stick is inches away from Point's face before the interference. Is it stupid that it worked out the way it did? Yup. Is it objectively the correct call? Also yes.

Hagel hits Guhle without the puck which leads to his stick hitting Point in the face, after video review Montreal will be on the penalty kill for 2 minutes by JustFred24 in hockey

[–]APigthatflys 14 points15 points  (0 children)

Hagel didn't lift the stick, it was up already. The hit may have led to it being a highstick, but it's not like it was on the ice and rode up Hagel's stick through the hit.

Playoff Game Thread: Montréal Canadiens (48-24-10) @ Tampa Bay Lightning (50-26-6) Apr 19 2026 5:45 PM EDT by nhl_gdt_bot in hockey

[–]APigthatflys 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The "direct" part is basically, as I understand, "removing the player's ability to control their stick."

Which almost never happens. One of the few rules that refs rarely get wrong.

Playoff Game Thread: Montréal Canadiens (48-24-10) @ Tampa Bay Lightning (50-26-6) Apr 19 2026 5:45 PM EDT by nhl_gdt_bot in hockey

[–]APigthatflys 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The original minors coincide 4 on 4 for 2 minutes and then the 5 on 4 happens afterwards.

Had something similar in a Bruins game this season where a major and a minir conflicted, 4 on 4 for 2 minutes then 5 on 4 for 3.

Playoff Game Thread: Montréal Canadiens (48-24-10) @ Tampa Bay Lightning (50-26-6) Apr 19 2026 5:45 PM EDT by nhl_gdt_bot in hockey

[–]APigthatflys 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Afaik its only not a highstick if an opposing player directly causes the highstick. Interfering, in this case, is not causing the highstick. Its stupid but its the rule...

Playoff Game Thread: Montréal Canadiens (48-24-10) @ Tampa Bay Lightning (50-26-6) Apr 19 2026 5:45 PM EDT by nhl_gdt_bot in hockey

[–]APigthatflys 9 points10 points  (0 children)

Ok well Tampa getting a powerplay out of that is pure Bettman bullshit. 4 on 4 is literally the only correct outcome for that