The Minnesota Wild secured a 3-2 overtime victory against the Nashville Predators on Tuesday night in a game marred by a highly controversial finish, sparking an unusual debate across the NHL. Marcus Johansson scored the decisive goal at 3:38 of overtime, but the circumstances surrounding the goal have ignited a firestorm of discussion regarding the application of NHL Rule 63.7 and its potential implications for future games.
The sequence began with a Wild offensive rush where Predators goaltender Justus Annunen, while backing up, dislodged the net from its moorings. Johansson's initial shot struck the moving net, but he regained possession and slid the puck across the goal line. After video review, the officials upheld the goal, citing that Annunen had intentionally dislodged the net, thus negating the stoppage of play.
Rule 63.7 of the NHL rulebook addresses situations where a defending player displaces the goalpost, stating that a goal may be awarded if the displacement was caused by the defending player, the attacking player had an imminent scoring opportunity before the displacement, and the puck would have entered the net between the normal position of the goalposts.
The Predators vehemently protested the ruling, arguing that Annunen did not intentionally dislodge the net and that Johansson's initial shot would not have resulted in a goal had the net remained in place. "The explanation was, in [the referee's] opinion, it was a goal. I disagree with his opinion, but that's the way it is," commented Predators coach Andrew Brunette. Stamkos, who tied the game with just 0.3 seconds remaining in regulation, echoed his coach's sentiment. "I don't think there was any intent from our goaltender to knock it off – it came off twice today," Stamkos said.
The NHL, in an effort to quell the rising controversy, issued a statement affirming the referees' decision, asserting that Annunen's actions were the reason for the net being dislodged. However, the explanation has done little to satisfy critics, who argue that awarding the goal undermines the integrity of the game and sets a questionable precedent.
The Wild's perspective is understandably different. Coach John Hynes admitted he wasn't initially sure of the rule but understood the call after reviewing the play. Johansson himself confessed to being unsure if the goal would count. "I didn't know really what happened," Johansson said. "Didn't know if we were supposed to celebrate or not".
The controversial ending overshadowed what was an otherwise exciting game. Kaprizov and Buium scored power-play goals for the Wild, while Wood also scored for the Predators. Gustavsson made 32 saves for the Wild. Stamkos's dramatic late goal forced overtime after Nick Blankenburg kept the puck in at the blue line and got the puck to Stamkos.
The debate surrounding the application of Rule 63.7 continues to rage on social media and among hockey analysts. Some argue that the rule was correctly applied, as Annunen's actions directly led to the net being dislodged during a scoring opportunity. Others contend that the intent of the rule is to prevent players from deliberately preventing a goal by knocking the net off its moorings, and that Annunen's actions did not meet that threshold.
The incident has sparked discussions about potential revisions to the rule or increased clarity in its interpretation. Some suggest that the league should consider implementing stricter penalties for goaltenders who dislodge the net, regardless of intent, while others advocate for a more nuanced approach that takes into account the specific circumstances of each incident. This controversial victory highlights the Minnesota Wild's pressing need for consistent performance.
