Preds Got Screwed Last Night

I know all of you are thinking, I can’t wait for noted hockey expert Clay Travis to break down the technicalities of why the Nashville Predator goal early in the second quarter didn’t count last night — so here I am. Just a regular Gordie Fucking Howe reincarnated to make sense of this huge mess.

First of all, everyone with a functional brain knows the referee totally blew it when he inadvertently blew his whistle and negated the Preds goal. I’ve only reffed one game ever and it was the Alabama spring game back in 2010. The most important rule we were told back then — DON’T BLOW YOUR WHISTLES.

So, yeah, don’t blow your fucking whistle unless you’re dating FLO-RIDA.

Now, granted, I don’t know much about hockey, but I do know to look at rules when controversies arise. That’s what the rule book exists for, to solve complex issues.

And here’s the rule on goal scoring reviews after a whistle is blown:

Now what does “culmination of a continuous play where the result was unimpacted by the whistle” actually look like on the ice when replay is implemented?

It looks like this goal from October, which featured the exact same scenario in Sabres-Flames as existed in Penguins-Preds and was allowed to stand upon review.

I mean, this is the exact same situation!

And they reviewed it and determined the goal should have counted.

So if you’re reviewing this play in a relatively meaningless regular season game in October, how in the world do you not review a goal in a scoreless game six of the Stanley Cup Final?

Still not convinced?

Okay, now look at this behind the goal view of the Preds situation. This goal is the very definition “of a continuous play where the result was unimpacted by the whistle.” This goal would have been scored whether there was a whistle or not. There is no one to stop the goal from being scored.

Under the NHL’s own rules this goal should have been reviewed and based on the precedent established above, it should have counted.

So it’s hard to come to any other conclusion than the NHL bungled this situation massively and cost the Preds a goal which would have given them a 1-0 lead in game six. What would have happened from there? We don’t know. But given how few goals were scored in this game — the Penguins didn’t score until 1:30 was left in regulation — isn’t it altogether likely that the failure to review this goal and reverse a clearly bad call by a referee cost the Preds the opportunity to play Game 7 on Wednesday night?

I think so.

Yes, bad calls happen in sports, but that’s why rules exist to ensure those bad calls are remedied when possible. Here the NHL has a specific rule designed for this exact game situation and it wasn’t accurately applied.

On its biggest stage, with the largest possible stakes, the NHL totally whiffed when it counted.

If this were the NFL, MLB or NBA, people would lose their minds.

But because it’s hockey, most won’t even notice.

Still, it’s shameful.

Written by Clay Travis

OutKick founder, host and author. He's presently banned from appearing on both CNN and ESPN because he’s too honest for both.

68 Comments

68 Pings & Trackbacks

  1. Pingback:

  2. Pingback:

  3. Pingback:

  4. Pingback:

  5. Pingback:

  6. Pingback:

  7. Pingback:

  8. Pingback:

  9. Pingback:

  10. Pingback:

  11. Pingback:

  12. Pingback:

  13. Pingback:

  14. Pingback:

  15. Pingback:

  16. Pingback:

  17. Pingback:

  18. Pingback:

  19. Pingback:

  20. Pingback:

  21. Pingback:

  22. Pingback:

  23. Pingback:

  24. Pingback:

  25. Pingback:

  26. Pingback:

  27. Pingback:

  28. Pingback:

  29. Pingback:

  30. Pingback:

  31. Pingback:

  32. Pingback:

  33. Pingback:

  34. Pingback:

  35. Pingback:

  36. Pingback:

  37. Pingback:

  38. Pingback:

  39. Pingback:

  40. Pingback:

  41. Pingback:

  42. Pingback:

  43. Pingback:

  44. Pingback:

  45. Pingback:

  46. Pingback:

  47. Pingback:

  48. Pingback:

  49. Pingback:

  50. Pingback:

  51. Pingback:

  52. Pingback:

  53. Pingback:

  54. Pingback:

  55. Pingback:

  56. Pingback:

  57. Pingback:

  58. Pingback:

  59. Pingback:

  60. Pingback:

  61. Pingback:

  62. Pingback:

  63. Pingback:

  64. Pingback:

  65. Pingback:

  66. Pingback:

  67. Pingback:

  68. Pingback: