Here, the NHL said, here’s a big glass of stupid for everybody.
And then he didn’t.
Toews goal was overturned upon review for what was called “interference with the goalkeeper.’’
The ruling on the ice was “good goal." The ruling after review was no goal because of “interference with the goaltender.’’
Nobody saw a referee make a goalie interference call, nor was Toews penalized. Everybody, however, saw the official point at the goal, a sign of a good goal.
And then it was no goal. Excuse me?
The NHL’s sent out this to further increase the stupidity:
“At 3:22 of the second period in the Kings/Blackhawks game, the referee consulted video review to see if Jonathan Toews' initial shot entered the Los Angeles net. It was determined Toews' initial shot did not enter the net. The referee's original call on the ice was "good goal" but a discussion between the on-ice officials resulted in a "no goal" decision because Toews made incidental contact with Kings goaltender Jonathan Quick before the puck crossed the goal line. This is not a reviewable play therefore the decision on the ice stands -- no goal and no penalty.’’
Wait, what? The decision on the ice was “good goal.’’ But the decision did not stand.
And the supposedly non-reviewable play was indeed reviewed.
Yes, we are all getting dumber by the NHL moment.
Turns out, incidental contact can be considered during a review which appears to be what happened. But the NHL instructs its refs to explain the disallowed goal because of “interference with the goalkeeper,’’ which presumes a penalty.
But not in this case.
All the official had to do was call it “incidental interference discovered during a review.’’ Simple.
The NHL’s chosen “interference’’ verbiage must be changed to stop the league from creating chaos in the most critical situations in the game.
The call, the review and the NHL’s explanation make this look like a graduate course in Clown College.