Loui Eriksson goals in first 33 games with Canucks : 6
Bo Horvat goals in first 33 games with Isles: 7

OT Winner Prediction for both teams:

EDM - Leon Draisaitl
LAK - Gabriel Vilardi

This high stick is causing quite the stir, and I'm curious what everyone on here thinks. There are a ton of people on Twitter saying that this is "poor for the NHL", but I disagree. How can you honestly expect the referees to see the puck slightly graze a players stick while it's at it's apex. Let's be real, the puck wasn't going higher than that. Had the puck not touched the stick at all, that play would have likely went on about the same.

That being said, I didn't see this live and all I am going off of is this short clip. I really hate that miniscule things like this can be so controversial. It's like when goals are called back because they were a hair offside. Did it really affect the play THAT much? Grasping at straws to try and justify a goal against ruins the fun of the game IMO. The NHL needs to severely work the rulebooks so stuff like this doesn't happen. More clarity is needed. Context matters so much

Remember that **** happening a few years ago I believe it was EDM vs. WPG

Forgot the player but I believe it lead to the game 3 winner

That said in that case it was evident. In this case I dont think we can for sure say it touched and if it did man were gonna need like a microscopic camera or something

Honestly, I can't see him touching the puck from that clip. If he did, the play had so little impact I have hard time believing it'd change the end result of the play massively. To me it seems like the puck bounced up and was rolling in its natural trajectory basically the whole time.

Horvat is Pageau with a slightly better finishing touch

If you look at the blade it then stick it moves a bit. It touches it jut it’s hard to tell.

Can't see it, I think it's just natural movement due to Vilardi changing position. Even the rolling of the puck doesn't stop, it only gets slower (at least in theory it should stop or that going the other way if there was a stick contact, unless the puck is touched in a very specific angle)...

We need to recall that this is a slow-mo, things happen much quicker in game. I'd call that inconclusive, personally. I'd need another angle at this to say it truly touched the stick, or Vilardi saying that it did lol.

Devils advocate, Arvidsson’s skate gets taken out and he’s not balanced which sends him flying

Take a number.
Don't get even, get 1-up!

I can’t see the puck touching Vilardi’s stick, that just looks like the puck hitting it’s apex and falling back down, it’s rotation doesn’t get thrown off. To your 2nd point, there will always be plays where one will argue it didn’t change the outcome if player X did Y but per the rules, it’s illegal, even if we changed the rules to it has to affect the play, then it would become even more subjective, this is the “we want the refs to call the book but also not call the book” nhl reffing will never please every fan ( though there are aspects that can certainly get better )

That’s how Danault “ shuts down” he gets way with 2 hand slashes and hauling him down to the ice and standing over him for like 5 seconds

Nurse literally barely touches him and he goes flying and he even flops his hands, plus you deserve to get hit when your still carring the puck up the ice after a whistle

same energy

That was 100% acting


Actually this foot gets caught nvm

I watched the Sharks literally throw the puck with their hands in the crease, in triple overtime, (Timo Meier to Karlsson) to win a playoff game.

This is a nothingburger to me, and im pulling for EDM.

Whether it tapped the stick or not, it did not change the play.

IF it hit the high stick, which is clearly debatable in itself, for me it would only irritate me if that happening changed the play, such as the above mentioned handpass.

An example of what irritates me, and I hate the Avs, but Landeskog being offside denying the goal 3 years ago did. That did not change the play at all. I wish it counted. Or the reviews where skates are hovering over the blue line irritate me. It even irritates me when it is in my teams favor.

I do not think hockey is better if we magnify every tiny detail, especially the ones that do not change the play whatsoever. This was a good goal.

We need to make a wheel of excuses for when a team loses a playoff game

"The other team was better" is a tiny tiny sliver. It happens sometimes, generally around Halley's comet sitings

We need to decrease judgement calls and game management. Debating whether something affected the play or not, is another subjective call.
The biggest issue with officiating is consistency. To get consistency, you need clear cut definitions of what is/isn't allowed.
High stick (SHOULD BE) a clear cut line. Same for offsides, whether a puck actually crosses the line, and anything else which can be called every time in the same way (with the benefit of review), is what we should be trying to perfect. Obviously we aren't there yet, because multi-million dollar broadcasting deals apparently don't include good enough angles or picture resolution.

We also need to eliminate as many situations as possible which can be deemed judgement calls without falling back to game management.
That means calling everything, every time, regardless of outcome or game situation. If one team gets 20 power plays and the other gets 1, one of those teams needs to make adjustments. The rules shouldn't adjust to prevent that team from taking too many penalties or to give them more power plays to "even things up".
You can not consistently or evenly enforce a rule that says "sometimes if this happens and results in this you should maybe consider giving a penalty to that player, depending on what the current score is and the difference in power play opportunities for each team". That is currently how the majority of the rules are applied. Getting line calls such as offsides and goals right, should be the bare minimum standard.

My 2 cents on the whole LAK high stick controversey

Its not conclusive enough to rule it therefore the goal counts

Friedman was talking about it and how a GM contacted him and told him at the last GM meeting there discussions about it. Basically the end of the discussion was made in order for it to be called and the goal taken away you need to present the most clear cut 100% fool proof evidence this happened and the goal should be taken away.

So unless there was a camera or sensor on the stick that could demonstrate the puck made contract at set time then its to uncertain to overturn. As yes at some angles it looks like it hit and others it didnt but from what I can see I dont think it hit it and if it did it had to have been so quick or so slight that u cant blame the refs on this one

Yeah, I'd much rather see the refs call the book than what we have. We need consistency in calls before we start making changes to the rule book

Honestly built in stick sensors that detect when the puck touches at certain times and microchipped pucks would solve a lot of the issues we see in controversial goals

Now option 1 would probs take some incredible engineering as a sensor that could be built within a hockey stick in a way to not interfere with the game would probs take Space X level tech guys and 10 years of development

As for microchipped pucks yea NHL bring those back. It would solve the "is it in the goal" issue. I know players complained but u can bring em back let the boyz get used to it

I would suggest reffing as a whole is lightyears better than it was, improving over time.

But the addition of camera angles and slow motion amplify the misses.

Hockey is pretty close to pinball except there are 6 foot sticks too.