Chicago Blackhawks Playoff Hopes Still Alive After Another Bad Call

Last night, once again, the NHL showed its inability to properly govern the game by calling a good goal in the Blackhawks questionable win over the St. Louis Blues at the United Center in Chicago. 

At the 7:52 mark of the second period, with the Blackhawks down by two goals, Hawk winger Marian Hossa (as shown on the video) kicked the puck toward the net, only to have the puck hit the goal post and take a somewhat ominous spin along the goal line to the other side of the net. 

The puck clearly did not completely cross the goal line before Blues goaltender Ty Conklin swept the puck from the goal line and trapped it in his glove to stop play.  

In my opinion, this was not a goal.

The referee on the ice called it a goal which set the NHL up for even more scrutiny as the good goal call on the ice now put the pressure on the reviewers in Toronto.

According to NHL rules, when a good goal is called on the ice, the video reviewers and their high tech equipment, can only over turn the call on the ice if they can conclusively decide—with no room for error—that the call was wrong.

The goal can be questioned for two reasons; first, Hossa kicked the puck toward the net and second, due to the fact that Conklin appeared to cover the puck while it was still moving which blocked the view of the overhead camera. 

Conklin’s glove did not give the reviewers a clear view of the puck’s trajectory after it took that odd bounce from the right goal post to the left. 

Based on the video, the fact that the puck did not completely cross the line would have certainly denied the goal if the referee on the ice hadn’t made the goal call, not to mention the kicking motion from Hossa. 

I agree with those who believe that the simple fact that the puck was initially kicked nullifies every questionable action that followed it. 

In a broader sense, calls like this one along with the somewhat inconsistent consequences from the various head shots this season, certainly puts NHL Commissioner Gary Bettman in the hot seat. 

Some rules appear too vague for interpretation while others, like the one highlighted here, are too regimented to allow for human reasoning to overturn rules made in the heat of the moment.  

I have been very critical of the head shots on Max Pacioretty and most recently the hit on Ryan Johnson. I feel that the NHL’s subjective interpretation of the player’s intent is one of the primary reasons why head shots continue to be an issue in the game. 

While intent can only be truly determined by talking with the player in question and the intended victim, I feel that the action itself is enough to justify consequences and suspensions. 

Keep in mind, I am not referring to any potential resulting injuries nor am I questioning the physicality of the game; I am simply referring to the actions alone that are evident on the video.

If an elbow makes contact with the head, then so be it; there will be consequences—period, end of story.

While I do believe the NHL is making an effort, albeit unsuccessfully, the players also need to police themselves to a certain extent as well.

Some feel that because of the vague and often arbitrary nature of the head shot rules—that this provides a loop hole for some of the more physical players to make the mea culpa confession with no further consequences.

What does this mean for the fans? It leaves us holding our collective breaths each and every time as we wait for the powers that be in Toronto to see if a call will fall in our favor this time or not. 

Last night, Blackhawk fans felt, for the first time in a while, that the hockey gods were cutting them a break that may well have kept their playoff hopes alive.

Apparently, Blues goaltender Ty Conklin felt the same way.

During post-game interviews he was quoted as saying, “Do we really have to make it that obvious the league wants them in (the playoffs)?” 

While Ty may be right, one thing is clear: It seems hard to know for sure from one day to the next what the league really wants.