85.1 Puck Out of Bounds (PDF):
… Should the puck strike the spectator netting at the ends and the corners of the arena, play shall be stopped and the ensuing face-off shall be determined as if the puck went outside the playing area. However, if the puck striking the spectator netting goes unnoticed by the on-ice officials, play shall continue as normal and resulting play with the puck shall be deemed a legitimate play. Players must not stop playing the game until they hear the whistle to do so.
My emphasis.
Discussion added (01. Mar, 12:28 AM): So that’s the rule. Fine. That doesn’t make it a good rule.
As Bruce MacLeod wrote, the key to the whole thing was the lack of noise. How four officials missed the lack of any sound such as the puck hitting glass is beyond me.
How is it that the puck is deflected high, over the glass so that it bulges the netting, falls back to the ice, and gets put in the net while four on-ice officials stand apparently oblivious to what’s going on around them?
Actually, the referee in the corner (I did not catch his number) was apparently not quite oblivious: he actually brought his whistle halfway to his mouth before letting his hand drop as the puck returned to view. If he intended to stop the play, wasn’t that puck dead under the accepted interpretation of Rule 32.2? Why didn’t he follow through on the motion? Was he not surprised that the puck fell to the ice after a noticeable delay?
The fact that both referees were experienced officials makes their blunder all the more disappointing. According to the NHL Officials Association website, Tom Kowal is an seven-year veteran with over 321 NHL regular season games under his belt. Paul Devorski has been officiating since 1989 and has appeared in over 1041 NHL regular season and 116 playoff games. That both missed the puck hitting the net is inexcusable.
I don’t want to get too hung up on a goal in a game in which the Sharks by and large dominated. However, what happened on that goal is shameful and an embarrassment to the NHL. It’s analogous to an NFL running back going out of bounds and then back in bounds on a touchdown play and every official on the field somehow missing it. Tell me people wouldn’t be justifiably upset.
What makes it worse is that there is no review on a play like that. As the rule says, any play following the striking of the netting by the puck that goes unnoticed by the referee is legitimate. That has to change when it leads directly to a goal. How can it still be considered a legitimate goal when the puck technically left the playing area?
In my opinion, the NHL should allow for the review of suspicious goals. Make it the job of the old goal judges to determine if a goal was scored under suspicious circumstances. If not the goal judges, allow the coaches of the team to challenge the goal.
Set up a checklist that includes looks at offsides, goaltender interference, high sticking, kicking motions, whistle blowing (intended or actual), the possibility that the puck went under the net or through the side, and possibility that the puck hit the netting. If any of those things occur during the offensive zone attack leading to the goal, it should be disallowed.
Giving the officials an out like Rule 85 currently does is just silly. Blowing a rule interpretation on goaltender interference is one thing. If they make a mistake on something such as rink boundaries or clearly definable lines, that’s another. That sort of thing is not open to interpretation. It’s pretty cut-and-dry, and video evidence can correct a mistake.
It’s easy to complain about the goal as the reason the Wings lost. However, they had plenty of time to stage a comeback and wouldn’t have been in that position had they not allowed the Sharks to dominate them in their own zone all night. Although the goal turned out to be the game winner, it’s not the real reason the Wings lost. They were outplayed, once again.
However, I point the goal out because I believe the League should make the easy rule change. Use modern technology. Eliminate cheap goals like that. Give your officials some support so they don’t have to bear the brunt of the fans’ ire for blowing a call that could be overturned by video evidence.
Thanks for posting that. I thought Mickey Redmond was going off a bit too much with the complaining (even still, glad to have him back). Of course it’s unfortunate and it couldn’t come at a worse time for the Wings, but I don’t want the precedent of having to review through Toronto whether the puck hit the netting on a given play, whether a goal results or not. Furthermore, I don’t think the NHL currently has cameras that can show the puck hitting the netting conclusively. The replay FSN was showing apparently showed the net rippling but if we start looking for that stuff…unfortunate for the Wings, but it happens.
The fact that you have failed to mention is thae fact that the Redwings have not had a game called in their favor in at least a month. Call me a conspiracy theorist, but the Wings are not liked around the NHL. The fact that the Wings defy logic with the abolity to rebuild on the fly with ease irks the rest of the league. The NHL should embrace the Redwings because they pay a clean fun to watch version of ice hockey that the rest of the league should be forced into developing.
I never assume a conspiracy if simple incompetence will account for something. The officiating is horrid league-wide, and it seems sometimes a coin toss as to whether or not it favors a particular team each night.
To have a goal count when it is clear that in fact the puck went out of play (no ifs or maybes) is sad and pathetic. And I don’t see why everything has to go through the “war room” in Toronto - give the goal judge a job and let him view the monitor and make the call in the arena if it is that obvious of a call. I don’t like to see any team get robbed because of a simple mistake like that - no interpretation or shades of gray, just a bad call.
Although it’s too bad that if the official was “thinking about blowing the whistle” it didn’t count as a dead puck, the way it does so often when a puck is semi-covered and then whacked into the net, but he rules it was too late because he was planning on blowing the whistle.
I wonder if that is why whenever the puck goes out of play, I remember how Chelios would indicate that very emphatically so the officials would be sure to notice? Maybe he’s seen that kind of thing before.
More Rules?
More Delays?
That will really help sell the game.
A simple re-design of the nets will solve the issue.
“How is it that the puck is deflected high, over the glass so that it bulges the netting, falls back to the ice, and gets put in the net while four on-ice officials stand apparently oblivious to what’s going on around them?…That both missed the puck hitting the net is inexcusable.”
I like Coach Babcock’s approach to the situation:
“The puck went up and hit the thing, rolls down, comes down the boards, rolls out front. Those referees do their job no different than we do, with as much pride as they can. They missed it. When you look at the video like all of us do, it seems very obvious. But we looked at the video. I didn’t see the puck, either.”
He makes a good point sometimes we just lose sight of the puck. It happens to everyone, and yes, that even happens to refs, Matt. I think early on in the post you came down a bit hard on the refs when your ultimate conclusion was that we need a rule change to allow for video review:
“Give your officials some support so they don’t have to bear the brunt of the fans’ ire for blowing a call that could be overturned by video evidence.”
The officiating in the NHL has made the league a joke. The momentum continued San Jose’s way after this goal and deflated the Wings… sure, the Wings could have come back, but this “goal” changed the outcome of the game.
You have FOUR officials out there and none of them noticed? And for one to bring a whistle halfway up to his mouth and not blow it? I thought play could be stopped if there was intention to blow the whistle???
Between this and seeing Lilja get that delay of game penalty the other night, which resulted in the Wings losing, I am starting to laugh at this league and game more and more…
the delay of game penalty for a player throwing the puck over the glass in the defensive zone (when it is unintentional), is the stupidest rule ever. There are much worse things that happen on the ice during the game that should be called than this… and for it to affect the outcome of a game is just stupid. I can understand the reasoning behind the rule and agree with it, *if* the player *intentionally* throws it over the glass to get themselves out of a tough situation/offensive press. But not when it is completely unintentional.
Both of these (nets, terrible replay/review rules/setup, and delay of game penalties) are examples of how Bettman and the league have tried changing the game and its rules to make it better… and both have ended up making it worse. And they wonder why fans are pissed. Get a clue!!!