Cale Makar’s goal late in the first period was all the buzz during and after the Colorado win. The Oilers had scored a goal with 23 seconds left in the opening frame to knot the score at 2-2, but just nine seconds later, the star defenseman for the Avs went in and ripped a shot past Mike Smith to give the Avs the lead back.
MORE: NHL playoff bracket 2022: Full schedule, TV channels, scores
At first glance, it appeared that Valeri Nichushkin was not onside, and Edmonton coach Jay Woodcroft challenged the play for offsides. However, after review, the play was deemed to be onside and the call on the ice stood as a good goal.
It certainly changed the momentum a bit as the Avs went into the intermission ahead rather than allowing a late goal to spoil their lead. As the game went on, the goal did not seem to matter as Colorado built a 7-3 lead. However, by the third period, the lead was down to 7-6, with an empty-net goal sealing a close win for the Avs.
It was a close call, one that split the opinions of former players, officials, and media members alike.
It’s fair to wonder: Had that goal been waived off, would the Oilers have completed the comeback?
What is the rule?
NHL rule 83.3 addresses
The league issued a short and sweet explanation:
While it may be a confusing ruling, it’s one that the NHL has stuck by on a couple of other occasions.
A similar incident happened in 2020 with the Bruins and the Canucks. Bruins defenseman Charlie McAvoy straddled the blue line and despite pushing the puck into the offensive zone, waited until teammate Sean Kuraly entered into the neutral zone before he touched the puck.
Charlie Coyle scored a few seconds later in the shift, and despite the Canucks’ challenge of the play, it was upheld and ruled it was onside, therefore, a good goal.
