The Winnipeg Jets were being dominated by the Washington Capitals in Saturday’s overtime period, but all it took was one break and a quick Mark Scheifele shot for Winnipeg to come out on top.
But you had to know what was coming next. A close break-in at the blueline just before the goal prompted Capitals coach Barry Trotz to challenge the play and whether or not the Jets were onside when they broke into the offensive zone. The determining factor in this play is Blake Wheeler’s foot. It doesn’t cross the line before the puck, but if it was in the air, the play would be offside.
Problem is, there’s no clear camera angle. If Wheeler’s skate was off the ice, it was off the ice by the tiniest measure. Ask Trotz, though, and he doesn’t even think it was a close call.
“Pretty confident you can clearly see his foot is up… I’m 100 per cent sure his foot is over,” Trotz said after the game. “You can’t have a play like that on a six-inch tablet. You better put it on a big screen and look at it and have the people who are making those decisions make those decisions.
“The league is doing their best to do it right. I’m totally for that, but I don’t know how they came up with inconclusive. It’s just my opinion.”
The NHL released a statement that the goal was allowed not because the play was ruled onside, but because the review was “not conclusive.” According to rule 78.7, the officials have to stand by the original ruling on the ice which, in this case, was an onside play and a good goal.
The review dragged on for nine minutes and was an anticlimactic end to a great overtime period. Jets coach Paul Maurice joked it was the “first time we celebrated a win three times.”
When the NHL started allowing offsides to be reviewed after goals, it probably didn’t envision the dry game of inches that would play out seemingly every night. It’s akin to Major League Baseball turning to video review this season and having players called out for their foot slipping off the base by the smallest of margins.
Instant replay cuts two ways. While the reviews are there to correct egregious calls, it’ll inevitably be used on plays like this, too. The rule wasn’t put in place with plays like this in mind, but you can’t have one without the other.
So what’s the fix here? Should there be a time limit on how long officials can review a play? Should the NHL’s war room, with their big-screen televisions, make the final call on all reviews to maintain consistency across all games and situations? Or should offside calls no longer be reviewable at all?
Because one thing’s for sure – if the Stanley Cup is decided on a play like this, the NHL will relive the 1999 final when Brett Hull scored one of the most controversial OT goals in NHL history. That’s a play the league would surely rather forget.
