Chicago Hockey Insider has no direct affiliation to the Chicago Blackhawks, NHL or NHLPA
Is the NHL rigging the game against the Chicago Blackhawks? Video footage proves it
Photo credit: X
The Chicago Blackhawks are down 1-0 in the 1st period thanks to a goal by Sam Steel.
The Blackhawks had played solid two-hundred-foot hockey tonight against the Dallas Stars to start the period.
But should Sam Steel's goal count?
You can see just prior to the goal in the video below, that the puck had touched camera equipment when the cord was on the ice.
Which realistically meant, the play should've stopped, but the NHL referees let the play continue.
This led to a goal by Sam Steel at 8:54 into the 1st period against goalie Arvid Soderblom tonight.
Even then, it doesn't make sense why the video coaches didn't call to challenge it, along with Richardson himself who should've been the first to call out the referees.
"This only will apply to delay of game penalties when the puck is determined to have deflected off a player, stick, glass or boards, and not on a judgment call on how the puck left the defensive zone," the NHL said.
This play should've fallen under rule 38.2 Section 5, in the 2024-2025 NHL Rulebook:
Penalty situations for «Delaying the game - puck over the
glass» - When a minor penalty for delaying the game has been
assessed under Rule 63.2 (iii) for shooting or batting the puck
out of play from the defending zone. This will only apply to delay
of game penalties when the shot/batted puck is determined to
have subsequently deflected off a player, stick, glass or boards,
etc., and not a judgment call. No challenge can be issued for a
non-call, in other words, no challenge is to be considered when
the On-Ice Officials deem that it was not a violation of Rule 63.2
(iii). A challenge can only be used to rescind a penalty, not to
have one assessed. In the event of a failed challenge, an
additional minor penalty (or double-minor penalty, as
appropriate) will be assessed (in addition to the existing delay of
game penalty).
glass» - When a minor penalty for delaying the game has been
assessed under Rule 63.2 (iii) for shooting or batting the puck
out of play from the defending zone. This will only apply to delay
of game penalties when the shot/batted puck is determined to
have subsequently deflected off a player, stick, glass or boards,
etc., and not a judgment call. No challenge can be issued for a
non-call, in other words, no challenge is to be considered when
the On-Ice Officials deem that it was not a violation of Rule 63.2
(iii). A challenge can only be used to rescind a penalty, not to
have one assessed. In the event of a failed challenge, an
additional minor penalty (or double-minor penalty, as
appropriate) will be assessed (in addition to the existing delay of
game penalty).
Once again, Toronto, Gary Bettman, and the referees are failing the game.
Referees in question tonight: Corey Syvret #23, Kyle Rehman #10
Linespeople: Matt MacPherson #83, Ben O'Quinn #91.
After seeing this footage do you think that was a goal?
| POLL | ||
NOVEMBRE 7 | 53 ANSWERS Is the NHL rigging the game against the Chicago Blackhawks? Video footage proves it Should the Sam Steel goal have counted? | ||
| Yes | 16 | 30.2 % |
| No | 37 | 69.8 % |
| List of polls | ||
