The NHL has an interesting policy on wanting to know when things happened - you know, when evidence is present. An ejection from the game for a major match penalty? Nah. You don't need evidence at that moment... maybe the next day when you decide if you should rescind a penalty. Do you need evidence to know if a disallowed goal is a mistake? No. A high stick or a kicked in puck? Absolutely.
What about biting? Sure, you need evidence of that. Montreal Canadiens forward Max Pacioretty thought he had plenty of evidence when he sent in photographs that showed bite marks on his wrist and thumb. Sure, the video might not have been 100% clear, but his discomfort in the video was. Why would any of this be faked?
In case you missed it, here is the bite in question:
It doesn't matter if it was faked or not -- the NHL wasn't listening to any of it. It was impressive by itself that they had a phone hearing with Mikhail Grabovski regarding the in...