The Blues benefited from a blown review decision, but there's a bigger issue here

The Blues benefited from a blown review decision, but there's a bigger issue here


The Blues benefited from a blown review decision, but there's a bigger issue here


The St. Louis Blues were on the fortunate end of a goal review against the Colorado Avalanche that has stirred up some controversy. The review indicated the Avalanche were offside, nullifying the goal which would have tied the score at 4-4 late in the third period. However, the review should have not overturned the goal because the player in question, Sven Andrighetto, created a new zone entry which is what the review should have focused on.


In summary, Andrighetto was offside and the official missed it. He then exited the zone, put himself onside, and then the goal was scored. The review should have only looked at the entry immediately before the goal, and not the entry that was offside.

Based on the current rules, that goal should have counted. It’s a tough blow for the Avalanche and a fortunate break for the Blues.

The NHL has admitted fault.

Their official statement should match the technicalities mentioned above. The review focused on the wrong zone entry.

Unfortunately, every hockey fan can admit that Andrighetto was offside by a large margin. There’s no debating that fact. However, the NHL’s current review system – as flawed and as overly complicated as it is – should have ignored that fact. The goal should have been a good one.

As a Blues fan (this is a Blues blog you’re on), I was pretty pleased to see the goal tossed. I do feel for the Avs because the goal really should have counted by the book.

Though the Blues benefited, the bigger picture here is more irritating. The NHL’s review system is supposed to improve the game, not create these very specific scenarios that leave more confusion. There was an offside call which should have been made here. The official completely missed it (he may have been screened), which led to all of this in the first place. The goal should have counted – by definition – but let’s not ignore that the NHL needs to clarify its own video review rules and work on its struggling officials. That missed offside call by the ref led to all of this in the first place.

Going a step further, does anyone really know what is goaltender interference and what isn’t? Even with the review system, there isn’t very much clarity. That’s a significant problem that the NHL apparently is in no rush to address. How is it that hockey fans – and players – seem to have fewer answers than they did before the era of video review? Some of this season’s interference calls – and non-calls – have been baffling.

Yes, the Blues benefited here. But, one day they won’t. Some day the incomplete review system will cost the Blues and fans won’t be quite as cheerful. The focus should be on correcting a broken system.

The game of hockey needs more from the NHL’s officials and its review system.

More Sports


I say a lot of stuff out here that ends up being wrong, but I am rarely called out for it. It’s a nice break from real life, in that (…)

More Blues