Both teams I wanted in the west are there. Still, that was such a cringy/frustrating/laughable call... Would have broken alot of things if I was a Blues player. That's beyond being bad. Argh. Feel you Blues fan.

They refs are looking right at the puck... how the hell do they miss this.

They didn't have their glasses on. I hope Pete DeBoer doesn't lose the lucky rabbit's foot he keeps in his pocket

These calls or should I say non calls should be a real hit when betting is involved .... no ???

I'm sure Bettman isn't thinking about gambling, only the brothels when he visits Vegas

Both teams I wanted in the west are there. Still, that was such a cringy/frustrating/laughable call... Would have broken alot of things if I was a Blues player. That's beyond being bad. Argh. Feel you Blues fan.
- MightyPee

This!

This is why you need one guy who’s ready to call it a career, to just knock the official out! Maybe they think twice before letting crap like this stand.

I’m not even a Blues fan, but that was just awful!! People need to be accountable for this stuff. Maybe a boycott of the next game to draw attention to horrible officiating. It would be a media circus if the Blues didn’t show up for the game.... a real punch in the gut to the NHL!

4 refs/linesman and nobody can see the blatant hand pass?

The Blues should have won that game in regulation, but the refs need to get an obvious call like that correct in overtime. To just say after the game its a non-reviewable play is pathetic. You have 4 officials on the ice. If you can't get that call correct, you shouldn't be out there officiating a playoff game.

What were they even discussing? Nonsense.

NHL officiating isn't bad, it's incompetent. We all know this.

The game itself was a microcosm of a lot of the things that's hampered this team throughout the season.

*Surrendering a goal on the next shift after scoring a goal.
*Their inability to close out an opponent. Blues played a near perfect third period but lacked the high level skill to finish off any one of the great scoring opportunities they had.
* Inability to hit an empty net. Jaden Schwartz should never be on the ice in an empty net situation.
* Icing the puck at the end of the game with the goal tender pulled repeatedly - as if its the game plan.


The little things are the big things.

It's little wonder all four of these officials missed the hand pass (but somehow were alert enough to give Mr. Hand Passer the assist on the goal).

All four of them also missed the obvious clearing of the puck over the glass by David Perron.

I checked out on the NHL years ago because they are so poorly run. This is nothing out of the ordinary.

Just awful non call. Can't believe they screwed up the game like that.

Embarrassingly bad.

Refs made a deplorable decision to impact the game's outcome. Absolutely gutless.

Refs made a deplorable decision to impact the game's outcome. Absolutely gutless.
- gabriel

All Binnington had to do was stop the shot, and it would have been a nothing play. Isn't that what everyone said about the Vegas play? Don't give up 4 goals and it would not have mattered.

All Binnington had to do was stop the shot, and it would have been a nothing play. Isn't that what everyone said about the Vegas play? Don't give up 4 goals and it would not have mattered.
- powerenforcer

All Binnington had to do was stop the shot, and it would have been a nothing play. Isn't that what everyone said about the Vegas play? Don't give up 4 goals and it would not have mattered.
- powerenforcer

That's not what I said about the Vegas Play. A bad call is a bad call. You don't judge it by the results. If Vegas had killed that penalty it still would have been a brutal 5 minutes major call. Its just worse that it knocked them out of the playoffs in a game they had been completely in control of.

This play is maybe worse because the hand pass was a part of the game winning sequence and goal.

I'm just shocked the refs looked at it and were fine skating off the ice and calling it a game.

NHL officiating isn't bad, it's incompetent. We all know this.

The game itself was a microcosm of a lot of the things that's hampered this team throughout the season.

*Surrendering a goal on the next shift after scoring a goal.
*Their inability to close out an opponent. Blues played a near perfect third period but lacked the high level skill to finish off any one of the great scoring opportunities they had.
* Inability to hit an empty net. Jaden Schwartz should never be on the ice in an empty net situation.
* Icing the puck at the end of the game with the goal tender pulled repeatedly - as if its the game plan.

The little things are the big things.

- bcallaway

This

Schenn and Schwartz (once with a goalie and once without) both had the insurance goals on their sticks in very, very high efficiency scoring chances and failed to convert.

Poor puck management while the other team has an extra skater has been an issue all year.

People are also missing the point regarding officiating and review imho. More on that in a second.

That's not what I said about the Vegas Play. A bad call is a bad call. You don't judge it by the results. If Vegas had killed that penalty it still would have been a brutal 5 minutes major call. Its just worse that it knocked them out of the playoffs in a game they had been completely in control of.

This play is maybe worse because the hand pass was a part of the game winning sequence and goal.

I'm just shocked the refs looked at it and were fine skating off the ice and calling it a game.
- Queenie_5_hole

The refs DIDN'T look at it. The refs and linesmen were conferring to see if anyone saw the alleged hand pass. They somehow did not so ruled the play a goal. The hand pass aspect isn't reviewable so nothing to look at in that regard.

another zebra controversy...just what bettmans parity nhl needs...

back ref was screened from the back weak side...but the other 3 can't miss that...we will see if the nhl comes clean with this one...

not reviewable...you can bet next year it will...
- bogiedoc

Herein lies the problem for me. The focus is going to be on the review which is dead wrong imho. If the NHL spent 1/4 as much money on designing a better way to officiate (perhaps a different number/setup/location, etc), better training the officials to be in better position, to improve their ability to make calls, etc. as they do on technology, you wouldn't need review nearly as much.

We need less review because the correct calls are getting made, not more review to just correct more bad original calls imho.

Review always has the risk of well, we're willing to fix these screw ups but not those which is always going to end up unbalanced and is always going to be a slippery slope.

I think the Blues should spend the first half of the first period in Game 4 blatantly hand passing, a la Philly refusing to play the puck a few years ago when Tampa was playing 1-3-1 in the neutral zone.

I wonder who the refs will favor when and if the Bruins and Sharks face each other in the finals? Both have been getting very favorable calls throughout these playoffs.

This

Schenn and Schwartz (once with a goalie and once without) both had the insurance goals on their sticks in very, very high efficiency scoring chances and failed to convert.

Poor puck management while the other team has an extra skater has been an issue all year.

People are also missing the point regarding officiating and review imho. More on that in a second.
- Jason Millen

Perron too at the beginning of the 3rd, had the one timer in front and put it into Jones' pads. Lots of chances missed for the blues in this game.

Herein lies the problem for me. The focus is going to be on the review which is dead wrong imho. If the NHL spent 1/4 as much money on designing a better way to officiate (perhaps a different number/setup/location, etc), better training the officials to be in better position, to improve their ability to make calls, etc. as they do on technology, you wouldn't need review nearly as much.

We need less review because the correct calls are getting made, not more review to just correct more bad original calls imho.

Review always has the risk of well, we're willing to fix these screw ups but not those which is always going to end up unbalanced and is always going to be a slippery slope.
- Jason Millen

I agree with you, however there needs to be some sort of rhyme or reason to what is "reviewable". How is an offsides that could have happened a minute or more before the goal reviewable but a hand pass or puck off the protective netting (luckily didn't cost the Bruins), or puck played with a high stick (other than the actual goal shot), etc. not reviewable? I understand non-called penalties not being reviewable since they are more or less judgement calls in most cases but the above list is pretty straight forward. I just don't get why offsides gets "special treatment" when it comes to being reviewable on a goal...just completely inconsistent.

Oh and the Blues got shafted...hopefully the hockey gods make up for it.

They were able to see enough to credit Nyquist with the primary assist, so clearly they saw he touched the puck...but they don't see how he got the puck over to Karlsson ?

They were able to see enough to credit Nyquist with the primary assist, so clearly they saw he touched the puck...but they don't see how he got the puck over to Karlsson ?
- RagingMike

Ummm, Nyquist gave the puck to Karlsson.

I agree with you, however there needs to be some sort of rhyme or reason to what is "reviewable". How is an offsides that could have happened a minute or more before the goal reviewable but a hand pass or puck off the protective netting (luckily didn't cost the Bruins), or puck played with a high stick (other than the actual goal shot), etc. not reviewable? I understand non-called penalties not being reviewable since they are more or less judgement calls in most cases but the above list is pretty straight forward. I just don't get why offsides gets "special treatment" when it comes to being reviewable on a goal...just completely inconsistent.

Oh and the Blues got shafted...hopefully the hockey gods make up for it.
- bluemoon737

The NHL is "Reactionary", not progressive. They will always remain unchanged UNLESS something embarrasses them or becomes a massive poop-show. In the offside case, I think it was ONE goal by Colorado...I Think... that someone (Duchesne maybe?) .....was a good 4 or 5 feet offside. It was a bad optic for the NHL. It was embarrassing, it was enough that all of a sudden..."Let's review all offside on a challenge, even if it a skate 1 mm above the ice".
Instead of addressing a massive oversight, it is now used to mircoscope any play at the blueline for a fraction of an inch.

No doubt, after the Pavalski play, and now this one. The NHL will again overreact and we will have some sort of coach flag throw or some gimmick to review penalties leading to goals.

The NHL.....reactive.....watch, see if we don't get these addressed at the next GMs meetings...

Perron too at the beginning of the 3rd, had the one timer in front and put it into Jones' pads. Lots of chances missed for the blues in this game.
- .....

The Blues were at a disadvantage as soon as the game went to overtime, having only five healthy defensemen. It was only going to be a matter of time through fatigue and the long change that the Sharks were going to steal that game.

I was hoping sleeping on that one would help but not the case so far

Will we see MDZ tomorrow?

I feel like the NHL should reimburse us for the cost of our tickets for the game