Tuukka Rask thought so. The league disagreed.
The Leafs outplayed the Bruins in all aspects of the game tonight, so it’s a little surprising that Game 5 came down late in the third period.
Auston Matthews broke the deadlock with a wicked one-timer with just under 9 minutes to go.
Immediately after the goal, Rask turned around and approached the officials, signaling that he was bumped by Zach Hyman in front.
The Bruins would challenge it, and after a fairly lengthy review, the league upheld the call on the ice: good goal.
Was it the right call? It’s hard to say. It seems like goalie interference is an ever-evolving rule. Sometimes it’s a penalty. Sometimes it’s no goal. Sometimes it’s a goal. Who knows?
The overhead angle didn’t look too bad, but this angle makes it look worse:
Leafs take a 1-0 lead from Auston Matthews’ goal. Was review for goalie interference pic.twitter.com/mGHAfAjJLI
— Pete Blackburn (@PeteBlackburn) April 20, 2019
You could certainly make the argument that Rask wasn’t going to get over there regardless, but that’s not really how goalie interference is supposed to work. A former goalie agreed with that assessment:
Wow. I guess they must have felt Rask wasn’t gonna be able to come across but to me it doesn’t matter, contact was made and in my opinion should’ve been overturned.
— Martin Biron (@martybiron43) April 20, 2019
Annnnnnnd another ex-goalie chimed in:
Omg didn’t see it live. Total interference
— Corey Hirsch (@CoreyHirsch) April 20, 2019
And a current goalie!
Once again the NHL goalie interference review is flawed. Someone that’s played the game in the blue paint should be in the situation room. Games are being lost in the playoffs and it’s not right. #inconsistent https://t.co/1DmPfnZC9K
— Cam Talbot (@ctalbot33) April 20, 2019
You know it’s bad when even Canadiens fans are on board:
Huge win for the Toronto Situation Room to put the Bruins on the brink of elimination. pic.twitter.com/XHaGW5EeHm
— The Habs Forum (@TheHabsForum) April 20, 2019
Per a communication from the league, this is the logic:
“If a review is not conclusive and/or there is any doubt whatsoever as to whether the call on the ice was correct, the original call on the ice will be confirmed.”
Whatever you say, NHL.
The call changed the tune of Leafs fans, who spent the earlier portion of the game complaining that the refs were bad and were biased; after this call, the refs were fair and good and wise. That’s the way it goes!
What do you think?