I saw some people mention about the ref missing the high stick call in the final minutes of the game. The ref did made the right call, because it was a follow through, therefore no penalty. Some of us (include me) didn't realize there is such rule. So here is the rule:
A "high stick" is one which is carried above the height of the opponent's shoulders. A player is permitted accidental contact on an opponent if the act is committed as a normal windup or follow through of a shooting motion
Not to mention Reich was bent over .. so I don't know where that stands as far as over an opponents shoulder. Is it his height standing or bent over?
It's gotta be standing. Take the extreme example: a defender going down to block a shot, doesn't get his face turned away in time, and the shot/pass follow-through nails him right in the face. There's no way that gets called a high-sticking penalty. Reich was bent over to the point his head was almost at Markov's hip. That's not a high-sticking penalty, no matter what Bruins fans think about it.
I am getting a kick out of the selective whining coming out of that camp today. Not a peep about the gift 5-on-3 they got to tie the game, it's all about the 4-minute high stick, the last trip, and insisiting that Markov dove. All Boston had to do was score on the remaining PP time after the 5-on-3 and they might well have won. They didn't get the job done, so naturally it's all the referees' fault. Losers
Right in the rulebook. First thing in the High Sticking section.
Markov = no penalty
Reich = clear trip...penalty
Cryers = S.T.F.U.
Don Cherry, Claude Julien and lots of Bruin fans have just made themselves look stupid. I always laugh when people complain about something when it's crystal clear in the rulebook what the rule is. Follow through is NOT a penalty and that's the way it is.
As for the Reich penalty...looks to me like Markov stepped on his stick but why would he put his stick in there in the first place. Reaching out like that and tripping a player is pretty tough to miss. And why did Julien have some 4th line scrub out in OT killing a penalty?
Wow...didnt know that rule...come to think of it, a lot of the refs seem not to know that rule
Funny you should say that. In the London Guelph series this year, Drew Doughty knocked out 6 of Akim Aliu's teeth and got no penalty. In this case the swipe at the puck by Doughty was a wild golf swing attempt to clear the puck. The Ref Supervisor defended the call initially, until the head of Refs in the OHL cleared matters up:
Then there was Guelph's Drew Doughty accidently hitting London's Akim Aliu with his stick and escaping punishment. The issue festered when supervisor Bill Prisniak commented that there was no penalty because the rule had changed.
To Hache's credit, he was straightforward about the call.
"The wrong call was made. There was a misinterpretation," he said. "We had a meeting prior to the playoffs where we discussed accidental high sticks on a natural follow through with an injury. There's no penalty. In this incident, there wasn't a natural follow through. The player is holding it like a golf club, he swings at the puck and hits Aliu. He should have been accessed a double minor for high sticking.
"We had discussed it over and over again . . . it was the wrong interpretation. I approached both officials and Bill Prisniak and we cleared that up. The rule has not changed. It's always been our rule."
The bottom line was the Ref and his Super thought that what Doughty did was a follow through and therefore no penalty. That was later straightened out as described above.
The operative word here is normal or natural follow through. Even refs screw that up