VIDEO: Rangers have apparent goal waved off for lack of video, lose 1-0

More NHL: Trades | Scores | Standings | League Leaders | Odds  | Power Rankings

Officially the New York Rangers didn't score any goals on Sunday at home against the San Jose Sharks despite outshooting them 41-29. Officially they lost 1-0 to one of the best teams in the NHL.

But unofficially? The Rangers did score. In the second period Carl Hagelin tried for the old wraparound and was actually quick enough to beat Sharks goalie Antti Niemi to the post to sneak it in. Or so it appeared.

Take a look at the zoomed-in GIF courtesy of @MyRegularFace:

Instead it was called no goal and even after review, the play was called no goal. Why no goal? It had nothing to do with interference or anything of that nature, the War Room said there was no actual video evidence the puck went in.

At 16:45 of the second period in the San Jose Sharks/New York Rangers game, the Situation Room initiated video review to further examine Carl Hagelin's wraparound attempt on the San Jose net. No camera angles provided to the Situation Room provided a clear image of the puck completely across the goal line. As a result, video review was inconclusive, therefore the referee's call on the ice stands - no goal New York Rangers.

As you can see above, there didn't seem to be a lack of evidence. Though was it absolutely conclusive? Perhaps not, that's a difficult burden of proof but the puck disappearing behind the post completely is a pretty good indication. You can make out the goal line and it sure looks like the puck goes all the way across. Tough call.

That meant the score stayed 1-0, a score that would to the finish. Niemi was otherwise outstanding, stoppping all 41 shots giving him the first Sharks shutout of the Rangers in franchise history.

But for the Rangers and their fans that's going to be a call they remember for a long time. With the Capitals winning on Sunday, the Rangers are just two points clear of the ninth team in the conference for the last wild card spot. So yes, that one point (potentially two) will likely loom very large.

Show Comments Hide Comments
Our Latest Stories