On Monday night, the Boston Bruins scored as many goals, two, as they had disallowed. Those two goals would’ve been the difference in what ended up as a 3-2 overtime loss to the Pittsburgh Penguins.
“We got some tough calls against us,” said Bruins head coach Claude Julien. “[It’s] a little frustrating, especially the number of goals that we’ve had turned back on us this year.” Let’s take a look at those disallowed goal calls from Monday night.
No Goal #1 – Patrice Bergeron
The first no-goal happened halfway through the opening period. Patrice Bergeron scored what would have been the tying goal, evening the score at one apiece. The Bruins’ center deflected a Kevan Miller shot in front, which was blocked by Penguins goaltender Marc-Andre Fleury. As the rebound bounced up in front of Fleury, Bergeron batted it out of mid-air and into the net.
Referee Kyle Rehman, positioned on the near side faceoff circle, called it a goal.
After further discussion with referee Brad Meier and linesmen Greg Devorksi and Brad Kovachik, the on-ice crew reversed their call. There was no goal on the play. Presumably, one or more of the other officials had a better angle of where the puck made contact with Bergeron’s stick. With the call on the ice changed, Rehman donned the headset to review the play with the Situation Room.
The NHL agreed, after further review, that the puck did indeed make contact with Bergeron’s stick above the height of the crossbar.
From the NHL:
At 10:00 of the first period in the Pittsburgh Penguins/Boston Bruins game, the referees held a group huddle that determined Patrice Bergeron’s stick was above the height of the crossbar when he deflected the puck into the net. Video review confirmed that group decision.
According to Rule 60.5 “An apparent goal scored by an attacking player who strikes the puck with his stick carried above the height of the crossbar of the goal frame shall not be allowed. The determining factor is where the puck makes contact with the stick.” No goal Boston.
“The closest referee calls it a goal,” said Julien. “Then it’s no goal because the three furthest ones think it’s a high stick.”
“I guess that’s what’s frustrating in my mind. I don’t know what the league looked at. When I looked at the replay myself it looked more inconclusive. They may contradict me and say they had a better angle from where they were, but that’s how it looked to me.”
No-Goal #2 – Carl Soderberg
Soderberg’s near-goal at 10:53 of the second period would’ve put the Bruins ahead 3-2. Once again, a rebound off Fleury found its way into the back of the net. This time, it was Milan Lucic deflecting the shot. The puck bounced off of Fleury and hit Soderberg up high before ending up in the goal.
Referee Kyle Rehman, in good position at the side of the net, emphatically waved off the goal. Again, the referee checking with the Situation Room, who confirmed the call.
From the NHL:
At 10:53 of the second period in the Pittsburgh Penguins/Boston Bruins game, video review confirmed the referee’s call on the ice that Carl Soderberg directed the puck into the Pittsburgh net with his glove.
According to Rule 67.6 “a goal cannot be scored by an attacking player who bats or directs the puck with his hand into the net.” No goal Boston.
Milan Lucic disagreed. “I thought it was a good goal. None of us made contact with the goalie. None of us – there was no batting motion with the hands,” said Lucic. “But it’s one of those things you can’t control. We all thought it was a good goal, and looking at it now it probably could’ve been the difference in the game. Referees have to go by their best judgments and it’s unfortunate that we didn’t get the call there.”
The calls may have been unfortunate for the Bruins, but it looks like the officials – and the NHL – got the calls right.