Nashville Predators Have Reputable Causes Why The Aim Ought to Not Have Counted
There was extra controversy within the NHL on Tuesday evening. No, it didn’t contain goalie interference. This time, the controversy surrounded a purpose scored by Minnesota Wild ahead Marcus Johansson into the boards, not the web, in extra time towards the Nashville Predators.
A TRULY WILD ENDING! ?
Marcus Johansson secures the Subway Canada OT winner for Minnesota. pic.twitter.com/By1CCyVZc2
— Sportsnet (@Sportsnet) November 5, 2025
There are two sides to each end result. The Wild are thrilled they gained, whereas the Predators are irritated they misplaced. And let’s be sincere, the Predators have legit gripes as to why they consider the purpose shouldn’t have counted.
NHL Rumors: Have Steven Stamkos and the Nashville Predators Had Commerce Discussions
Earlier than diving into these, do not forget that the official’s name on the ice was a purpose. The officers believed that Predators goaltender Justus Annunen knocked the web off on function, stopping a purpose. So which means there must be indeniable video proof to overturn this name.
The NHL State of affairs Room agreed with the officers on the ice. It’s nonetheless unclear who made the choice, however after the replay course of, it was decided that the Wild gained the sport and that Marcus Johansson’s purpose stood, citing Rule 63.7.
The choice was made in accordance with Rule 63.7which states “Within the occasion that the purpose submit is displaced, both intentionally or unintentionally, by a defending participant, previous to the puck crossing the purpose line between the traditional place of the goalposts, the Referee could award a purpose.
To be able to award a purpose on this scenario, the purpose submit should have been displaced by the actions of a defending participant, the attacking participant should have an imminent scoring alternative previous to the purpose submit being displaced, and it should be decided that the puck would have entered the web between the traditional place of the purpose posts.”
Nevertheless, the reason leaves a lot to be desired and is open to many interpretations. Look, even Steven Stamkos of the Nashville Predators, when speaking with Lyndsay Rowley of Fox Sports Nashville, interpreted the rule fully in a different way from what the decision on the ice was.
Effectively, I feel Toronto ended up making the decision. Clearly, one of many refs who known as it a purpose on the ice thought that our goaltender pushed the web off on function and due to this fact denied a possibility for them to attain.
However clearly, there’s two sides to all the pieces. Our facet thought clearly the web got here off, however he missed the shot and it went large, and if the web wasn’t off within the angle that it was at, the puck would have went behind the web, and due to this fact he wouldn’t have had a second alternative.
So if we’re staying true to the rule. And our interpretation of it’s, if the web is off and it immediately impacts a purpose that’s scored, then, yeah, we have now no downside with that, however the unique shot didn’t go in, and the puck bounced again to him as a result of the web was off. In order that’s the place we have been, slightly confused.
NHL Rumors: Is Time Winding Down in Nashville for Steven Stamkos?
The Predators aren’t denying the web got here off. Nevertheless, that was the second time the web got here off within the sport. And Annunen didn’t bump the web that onerous to knock it off. Nevertheless, the referees decided that Annunen had intentionally knocked the web off to disclaim a purpose. This can be a important assumption on the a part of each the officers and the State of affairs Room.
Effectively that was Wild!
The @mnwild win it in @Energizer extra time! ? pic.twitter.com/J4aVooBRPT
— NHL (@NHL) November 5, 2025
A number of different choices might have performed out. Say the web doesn’t come off, and the go from Kirill Kaprizov to Marcus Johansson nonetheless will get by way of, does Johansson even rating? The best way he was angled, that puck goes behind the web or at the least to the skin mesh. Perhaps Justus Annunen makes a save there on Johansson. We’ve seen that earlier than.
The NHL Has a Goalie Interference Drawback
The truth that the puck comes again to Johansson after the preliminary shot, the whistle ought to have blown. However good on Marcus Johansson for enjoying till he heard a whistle. That’s what you might be taught as a child. Play till the whistle. However this was not a continuation play. Subsequently, the whistle ought to have gone and the play ought to have halted.
However with out an official explanation on who made the decision, even the reply is open to interpretation.
Have you ever subscribed to our YouTube channel? Rumor roundups and sizzling matters from across the league. We’re additionally posting some stuff on Instagram.
