The Kings disputed Brayden Schenn’s game-winning goal that clinched the Flyers’ 3-2 overtime win at the Wells Fargo Center on Tuesday night, with Darryl Sutter referencing the contact that Jonathan Quick took as a reason why the goal shouldn’t have counted.
“Unless the puck’s in before there’s contact, it shouldn’t be a goal,” he said.
In a rebound situation, or where a goalkeeper and attacking player(s) are simultaneously attempting to play a loose puck, whether inside or outside the crease, incidental contact with the goalkeeper will be permitted, and any goal that is scored as a result thereof will be allowed.
In the event that a goalkeeper has been pushed into the net together with the puck by an attacking player after making a stop, the goal will be disallowed. If applicable, appropriate penalties will be assessed.
In the event that the puck is under a player in or around the crease area (deliberately or otherwise), a goal cannot be scored by pushing this player together with the puck into the goal. If applicable, the appropriate penalties will be assessed, including a penalty shot if deemed to be covered in the crease deliberately.
At 2:36 of overtime in the Kings/Flyers game, the Situation Room initiated a video review to further examine a play at the Los Angeles net. The original call by the referee closest to the Kings net was “no goal” but after the four on-ice officials huddled, the call on the ice was changed to “good goal.” Video review supported the final on-ice decision that the puck crossed the Kings goal line on the original shot by Brayden Schenn. Good goal Philadelphia.
It is unclear whether the original call was “no goal” because the referee who made the initial call couldn’t see the puck crossing the line, or because the he decided that the contact applied by Schenn carried Quick into the net. The referee who signaled no goal was TJ Luxmore, the less experienced of the two referees.
Jonathan Quick, on whether he felt he was pushed into the net:
No, I know I was. I didn’t ‘feel.’ I know. So that should be no goal. I don’t know how that goes upstairs and still they get it wrong. I don’t know the excat ruling on that because they seem to change it every year, but usually you’re not allowed to push a goalie into the net, so I don’t know. Maybe they changed it again on us.
Quick, on earning a point without several key players:
Yeah, but you’re expected to work. Obviously we didn’t have a great first and fought our way back into it, and you kind of get the game taken away from you in overtime.
Quick, on any satisfaction over earning a point given the circumstances of the game:
No, you play to get two. We didn’t get two.
Darryl Sutter, on whether the call on the ice was correct:
They have the right to review it, so whether it was or not, it doesn’t matter whether I think if it’s correct or not correct. It really has no bearing on anything. He was safe at third and he was out at home.