Imagine this: the clock is ticking down in overtime, the tension is palpable, and then—chaos. A goal is scored, but the net is off its moorings. Should it count? This is exactly what happened in a recent nail-biter between the Minnesota Wild and the Nashville Predators, leaving fans and players alike scratching their heads. But here's where it gets controversial: the goal was allowed, and the Predators are far from happy about it.
On Tuesday night, Wild forward Kirill Kaprizov executed a slick pass across the crease to Marcus Johansson just as Predators goalie Justus Annunen inadvertently knocked the net off its moorings. Johansson’s initial shot hit the side of the dislodged net, but he quickly recovered the puck and backhanded it over the goal line. The referee immediately signaled a goal at 3:38 of overtime, a decision that was upheld after an NHL video review. The Wild secured a 3-2 victory, adding insult to injury for the Predators, who had just seen Steven Stamkos tie the game with a jaw-dropping goal with only 0.3 seconds left in regulation.
Nashville’s frustration was palpable. Coach Andrew Brunette expressed his disagreement with the call, stating, 'The explanation was that, in [the referee's] opinion, it was a goal. I disagree with his opinion, but that's the way it is.' Stamkos echoed this sentiment, calling the play 'weird' and questioning the decisiveness of the goal call. 'The confusing part for us was why it was so emphatically called [a goal],' he said. 'If the puck goes in right away, no problem if the net is off. But he missed the net, and the puck actually bounced back to him because the net was sideways.'
The NHL’s Situation Room justified the goal by citing Rule 63.7, which states that a goal can be awarded if the net is displaced by a defending player before an 'imminent scoring opportunity' and if the puck would have entered the net between the normal position of the goalposts. In this case, they determined that Annunen’s actions caused the net to dislodge before Johansson’s scoring chance. But this is the part most people miss: Stamkos argued that Johansson’s goal was only possible because the net was off its moorings. 'If not, the puck goes behind the net, and we live to fight another day,' he said.
Brunette defended his goalie, insisting there was no intent to dislodge the net. 'I don’t think just by the physics of pushing that’s what he was trying to do,' he explained. 'Unfortunately, they didn’t see it the same way. And you move on.'
This win marked the Wild’s second consecutive victory, improving their season record to 5-6-3, while the Predators fell to 5-6-4 after their second straight overtime loss. 'We deserved a lot better, for sure. One of our best games of the season,' Stamkos lamented.
But here’s the burning question: Did the officials get it right, or was this a case of the rules working against the spirit of the game? Was Johansson’s goal a legitimate scoring opportunity, or did the dislodged net unfairly alter the play? Let us know your thoughts in the comments—this is one debate that’s sure to spark some heated discussions!
