Mastodon
@Toronto Maple Leafs

McMann high sticking on Crosby? Have your say!



Bobby McMann got his stick up next to Sidney Crosby’s face at the same time the puck struck Crosby in the mouth. There was no call for high sticking and after review the officials determined that only the puck hit Crosby, so there was no high sticking penalty issued.
Did they get it right? Have your say!

31 Comments

  1. should have been 2 minutes. BUT crosby was a little baby this entire game. lost a lot of respect for him tbh.

  2. Stick makes direct contact with the face. 60.1 states very clearly “a wild swing at a bouncing puck” does not negate the penalty. 4 minutes.

  3. Both the stick and puck hit his face. Crosby puts his head down and doesn't complain. Same with Matthew's interference.. No penalty and crosby said nothing

  4. Considering there seems to be zero space between the stick and the puck on contact with Crosby, they should have easily called that a high stick. An errant swing to someone's face like that should be penalized.

  5. This found a loophole in the rules. The decision and interpretation made was that if the puck is the point of contact, it's not a penalty regardless of any other rule in existence because it means you didn't touch him. Technically someone could flip a puck up and you could punch a person if you managed to get the puck on your fist in the air.
    This has never happened before and will rarely happen again.

  6. It’s about time the crybaby didn’t get the call, he gets away with far worse all the time.

  7. The stick did not hit Crosby… right call… dumb rule. Careless stick penalty doesn't exist, so there you go.

  8. Interesting. There was another scene which McCabe directed Crosby's crash to the Leafs net and after Crosby was getting up, if it wasn't for another Penguin player stopping McMann, he would had collided with Crosby too. Seems like there's a Leafs team effort to injure Crosby.

  9. Refs don't think!It amazes me what they will call and what they won't.They love it when they have to call the delay of game for shooting the puck out of the rink because they don't have to think whether to call it or not.

  10. How does the official look right at it and nothing? That's clear as day, he hit him right in the face. No wonder people have no idea what's a penalty anymore.

  11. It was a double whammy mcmann did have a high stick but played the puck unfortunately there was no room between his stick and the puck and the puck to his face. He didn’t hit Crosby face with his stick he hit the puck into Crosby face

  12. Looks like both the puck and stick made contact. Stick definitely hit his visor, at least. Puck went off his chin/mouth area. Probabaly should've been called.

  13. I guess it’s ok to high stick as long as the puck is sandwiched between the blade and the face….seriously, WTF?

  14. I mean the rulebook says that it's not a high-stick if committed "as normal windup or follow through of a shooting motion" and "A wild swing at a bouncing puck would not be considered a normal windup or follow through and any contact to an opponent above the height of the shoulders shall be penalized accordingly."

    So by the wording of the rule I would think it'd be a high stick. That puck was hitting Crosby's face regardless so it's not like the high-stick necessarily changed the outcome of the play as far as causing him any injury, but from what I can see it looks like McMann still got him in at least the visor with his stick and regardless of whether McMann hit the puck or "played" the puck, it probably should still be a high-stick even if the puck was what did the majority of the damage.

  15. Penalty. Even if it was just to remind McMann that he needs to have control of his stick. Could have been way worse for Crosby.

  16. Of course it’s high sticking! It’s a stick. It’s high. It hit the player in the face: high stick by definition.

Write A Comment