Oilers, Kings have goal reversed twice in final seconds after two reviews, leading to Edmonton win

Evan Sporer

•
Oilers, Kings have goal reversed twice in final seconds after two reviews, leading to Edmonton win image

Stop us if you've heard this one before, but a controversial and confusing goal review impacted an NHL game in a major way. On Saturday, a goaltender interference review quite literally changed the outcome of the Edmonton Oilers and Los Angeles Kings game, taking a goal off the board with less than 10 seconds remaining in regulation, leading to an Edmonton victory.

The craziness began with less than a minute left in regulation, but not on that specific play. The Oilers' Ryan Strome had scored an empty-net goal to make it 4-2, giving the Oilers a bit of a cushion with 59 seconds remaining.

While it seemed like the game was out of reach for the Kings, Dustin Brown gave Los Angeles a sliver of hope with 18 seconds remaining in regulation when he halved that deficit and got the score to 4-3. Interesting, but still a complete and total long shot for the Kings to get the game-tying goal.

That was until nine seconds later, when Brown was left all alone in front of the net and tried to jam the puck past the pad of Cam Talbot. The referees never signaled for a goal, the puck remained loose, and time expired, with the Oilers winning the game 4-3.

But the Kings players on the ice immediately asked for the play to be reviewed, arguing that Brown's shot actually did cross the line. The referees convened and did so, and after checking out the replays, ruled that Brown's stuff attempts actually did make it over the goal line, clearly and conclusively, tying the game at 4-4.

That was until Oilers head coach Todd McLellan came back with a coach's challenge of his own, arguing that Brown's whacks at the lookse puck into Talbot's pad actually constituted goaltender interference, forcing Talbot's pad to concede the space and causing the puck to cross the line.

And low and behold, the replay center in Toronto agreed, taking the goal back off the board, and reinstating the Oilers 4-3 lead. Because there was ruled to be goaltender interference, the play was retroactively blown dead there, and the puck was dropped again with 10 seconds put back on the clock, a formality for a 4-3 Oilers victory.

How bizarre was the finish? It was actually McLellan's first successful coach's challenge in his three years behind the Oilers bench, according to Sportsnet .

Fox Sports West studio analyst Jim Fox came on the air after the game and talked through some of confusion of the ending, not only as it pertained to the Kings-Oilers finish, but also the pervasive lack of clarity surrounding video review in the NHL.

"It's going to be a very detailed and complicated explanation," Fox said. "I think what they ruled was that first poke by Dustin Brown put the goaltender in a position where he could not play his normal position. When the puck actually crossed the line, that was 'OK.' Preceding that, that's when the issue went wrong.

"All I'm hoping for is this: We just want ... Toronto many times issues a statement, and it's very vague, and it's very generic. I hope they do, and I hope they do break that down step by step. Whether we will agree with it or not because it's a hockey play, you're in there, you're not trying to go after the goaltender, you're trying to go after the puck. Dustin Brown's stick did hit the pad, and then on the second play, he hit the puck."

Playing at the Staples Center and with a chance to move into a tie for the second wild card spot with a victory, the reviews and waffling left the hometown crowd furiously booing and chanting in the closing seconds. While there was elation when the no-goal was originally overturned, happiness quickly turned to confusion and anger after another review was initiated.

"What would have eliminated everything is this: If possible, if the announcement could have been made in two segments, but at the same time. So you make the announcement: 'The puck did cross the line, but it is being challenged by the room in Toronto' ... or wait, don't even make the announcement on the puck crossing the line. When you get there, the puck did cross the line, but it was preceded by goaltender interference. Make that announcement all in one, and that's the perfect way of handling it."

The play was understandably frustrating for Brown.

"I wasn't told what the call was," he said. "What did I see? I saw the puck was loose, and I was hitting it in the net.

"It goes from one extreme to the other. I knew it was in the net on the ice on the challenge, and then again, goaltender interference comes up, again."

"The puck is loose. If the puck is trapped under his pad and you jam it in the net, I get it. That's been the standard. I'm hitting the puck in front of the pad. What am I supposed to do? It's frustrating.

" ... They want more goals."

Head coach John Stevens also voiced his frustration in the postgame, saying, "The league is confused and I'm confused. They don't know what it is, so how the hell are we supposed to know what it is?"

The NHL treated the sequence like two separate reviews in its explanation, offering up two different releases for each. First, for the puck crossing the line, which overturned the no-goal:

At 20:00 of the third period in the Oilers/Kings game, the Situation Room initiated a video review to further examine a play at the Edmonton net.

Video review determined that the puck completely crossed the Edmonton goal line at 19:50. Therefore, the clock is reset to show 9.8 seconds (19:50 elapsed time) and good goal Los Angeles.

And then, for the goaltender interference, which took the goal back off the board: 

At 19:50 of the third period in the Oilers/Kings game, the Situation Room initiated a review under the terms of a Coach's Challenge to review whether Los Angeles' Dustin Brown interfered with Edmonton goaltender Cam Talbot prior to his goal.

After reviewing all available replays and consulting with NHL Hockey Operations staff, the Referee determined that Brown pushed Talbot's pad and the puck across the goal line. According to Rule 78.5 (ix) "Apparent goals shall be disallowed by the Referee when a goaltender has been pushed into the net together with the puck after making a save."

Therefore the original call is overturned - no goal Los Angeles Kings.

Evan Sporer