Skip to main content

Headlines

Situation Room

Initiated Challenge: SJS @ NSH - 7:34 of Overtime

Original call stands - no goal Sharks; Pavelski made contact with Rinne

NHL.com @NHL

Situation Room: SJS vs. NSH, Gm4

Situation Room: Pavelski no-goal call stands

R2, Gm4: After video review, it is determined that Joe Pavelski interfered with Pekka Rinne, confirming the call on the ice of no goal

  • 01:07 •

At 7:34 of overtime in the Sharks/Predators game, the Situation Room initiated a review under the terms of a Coach's Challenge to review the "Interference on the Goalkeeper" decision that resulted in a "no goal" call.

After reviewing all available replays and consulting with NHL Hockey Operations staff, the Referee confirmed that San Jose's Joe Pavelski made incidental contact with Nashville goaltender Pekka Rinne before the puck crossed the goal line, preventing Rinne from doing his job in the crease.

Therefore the original call stands - no goal San Jose Sharks.

--- 

NOTE: In the final minute of play in the third period and at any point in Overtime (Regular Season and Playoffs), Hockey Operations will initiate the review of any scenario that would otherwise be subject to a Coach's Challenge. 

--- 

Coach's Challenge 
1. A team may only request a Coach's Challenge to review the following scenarios:

a) "Off-Side" Play Leading to a Goal 
A play that results in a "GOAL" call on the ice where the defending team asserts that the play should have been stopped by reason of an "Off-Side" infraction by the attacking team. 

b) Scoring Plays Involving Potential "Interference on the Goalkeeper" 

(i) A play that results in a "GOAL" call on the ice where the defending team asserts that the goal should have been disallowed due to "Interference on the Goalkeeper," as described in Rules 69.1, 69.3 and 69.4; or 

(ii) A play that results in a "NO GOAL" call on the ice despite the puck having entered the net, where the on-ice Officials have determined that the attacking team was guilty of "Interference on the Goalkeeper" but where the attacking team asserts: (i) there was no actual contact of any kind initiated by an attacking Player with the goalkeeper; or (ii) the attacking Player was pushed, shoved, or fouled by a defending Player causing the attacking Player to come into contact with the goalkeeper; or (iii) the attacking Player's positioning within the goal crease did not impair the goalkeeper's ability to defend his goal and, in fact, had no discernible impact on the play. 

2. A team may only request a Coach's Challenge if they have their time-out available and the Coach's Challenge must be effectively initiated prior to the resumption of play. 

3. If the Coach's Challenge does not result in the original call on the ice being overturned, the team exercising such challenge will forfeit its time-out. 

4. If the Coach's Challenge does result in the call on the ice being overturned, the team successfully exercising such challenge will retain its time-out. At 7:34 of overtime in the Sharks/Predators game, the Situation Room initiated a review under the terms of a Coach's Challenge to review the "Interference on the Goalkeeper" decision that resulted in a "no goal" call.

View More