Flyers Fans
Many Flyers Fans were reacting overnight to the disallowed goal by Rodrigo Abols. It came at a key moment during the game where the Leafs were leading the Flyers 4-1 early in the 3rd period. You hear folks debating the high stick rule and two different terms being bandied about, “above the shoulder” as opposed to “above the post”. What does the NHL rulebook have to say?
Abols made contact with the puck with what was ruled to be a high stick but that deflection was handled by Leafs netminder Anthony Stolarz. Abols picked up the rebound and chipped it past the goaltender.
According to the NHL 2025-26 rulebook a goal will not be allowed if a players stick makes contact with the puck above the height of the “crossbar”. Abols goal scoring shot was from ice level so what gives? When a player makes contact with the puck with a stick that is above the players “shoulders” play will be blown dead when the offending team gains possession.
So according to the rule, play should have been whistled dead as soon as Abols touched the rebound. That is if you agree with the call that contact was made above the shoulder to begin with.
NHL vs AHL
The NHL automatically reviews goals possibly directed into the net with a high stick. Remember this goal came after a possible high stick and not from a possible high stick. In the ALH the review must be initiated and requested by the on ice officials. This would explain Rodrigo Abols comments after the game.
“Let it play out. There’s 17 cameras just let it play out. The other ref said he’s from the AHL so maybe his initial instincts kicked in cause there no reviews there“. It would be more accurate to say there are no automatic reviews there. Rodrigo was not being salty, He said he didn’t want to “be a baby about it“, he was also granting the interview after getting five stitches in his tongue during the game so lets take his word for it, he was not being a baby.
Clarification
Was Abols stick above the shoulder when making contact with the puck? That unfortunately depends on who you ask. Just to clarify if the original deflection did go in there would have been an automatic review to see if the stick was “above the post” when contact was made with the puck.
Instead play was blown dead when Abols picked up the rebound based on the fact that a call was made on the ice that the puck was touched by a stick “above the shoulder” before the offending team gained control of the puck.
The “above the shoulder” rule gives a lot more leeway to a player like Abols who is 6′-4″ than it would for a player like, shall we say, Matvei Michkov.
Toronto Fans
Which brings us to Matvei Michkov and the interference call against him concerning the hit on Chris Taney. If you are a devout follower of the Toronto Maple Leafs there’s a good chance that you were infuriated by the two minute minor interference penalty accessed to Michkov after Taney left the ice on a stretcher.
The hit was quite an unfortunate incident to say the least. Upon closer review it could almost be described as a collision although only one player is facing the play. It was not a necessarily an egregious or particularly hostile action. Was it illegal? Yes.
Compound the situation with the fact that it was Taney’s first game back after missing extended time with a concussion. The decision to come back to NHL play is on him and his medical staff. It is not everyone else’s responsibility to be aware and play to their opponents specific situations. That’s not what I’m saying. But Michkov needs to do his best to avoid the contact. You could argue that he leaned into it a bit or possibly just had the opportunity to brace for it. And for sure Taney had no idea it was coming. The results of the contact were far worse than the infraction itself.
Context
Compare this interference call to the call made last February after Pittsburgh Penguin Bokondji Imama blind-sided Flyer Garnet Hathaway. The hit was so intentional and out of the blue. Hathaway was nowhere near the puck and the hit incapacitated him immediately. He missed 15 games as a result of injury sustained. Very different situation, but the same penalty. The ruling in both cases is very similar.
Honest Question
Should the league have a standard in place that differentiates a random interference where one player impedes another from participating in the play from an unwarranted hit from behind. I lean towards being and “old time hockey” sort of guy and I am usually leery of new penalties may weaken the physicality of the sport. That being said there are cases where interference seems too broad of a term. If you hinder a players progress along the boards it is much different in intent and result than a blind-sided hit to a player who is not in possession of the puck.
There are those that say you can’t alter the call based on the result but that is exactly what is in place for high sticking penalties. When an on ice official examines the inside of a players mouth looking for blood the penalty is being judged based on the result. The penalty doled out is twice as long if there is the mere presence of blood. When a stretcher is necessary to remove the player from the ice should a similar consideration be made?
Perhaps the penalty for interference does not have to change but a rule where a random hit from behind is considered a separate infraction all together. The way that “boarding” carries it’s own system of judgment on the discretion of the on ice officials concerning minor, major, match penalties based on weather there was a “deliberate intent to injure”.
Checking is one of the most exciting aspects in the sport of ice hockey. It is already illegal to just take a run at anyone on the ice at any given time. The recipient of the hit must be in possession of the puck. Enhanced policing hits away from the puck would not affect the physicality or flow of the game.
As it stands, and judging by Michkov’s apparent lack of hostility involved in the collision, it seems the right call was made. It was an unfortunate situation and nobody wants to see guys getting wrecked for no reason. Taney was motionless on the ice before being taken away, his bell was clearly rung. He was taken to a hospital in Philadelphia where he was kept overnight for testing before being released this morning.
Check out our Flyers Nitty Gritty Store
Cool Matvei Michkov merchandise
About Author
