Elliotte Friedman raises doubts over OT goal in Oilers’ Game 4 loss
TL;DR
Elliotte Friedman raised concerns about a disputed overtime goal that led to the Edmonton Oilers' 4-3 loss to the Anaheim Ducks in Game 4 of the NHL playoffs. He questioned the review process and the lack of conclusive evidence to overturn the on-ice call.
Key points
- Elliotte Friedman raised doubts about an overtime goal
- The goal led to the Oilers' 4-3 loss to the Ducks
- Friedman questioned the review process and evidence
- No official was present behind the net during the review
Mentioned in this story
The Edmonton Oilers are at the center of a new controversy after a disputed overtime call in Game 4 of the NHL playoffs’ first-round series. Elliotte Friedman questioned the ruling that handed the Anaheim Ducks a 4-3 win on Sunday.
Speaking during a Sportsnet broadcast after the game, Friedman explained the controversy around the review process.
“Okay, so basically because it was ruled a good goal on the ice, they have to be able to completely overturn it or have a conclusive review to overturn it, and basically, there’s nothing conclusive that says the call on the ice is wrong,” Friedman said. “They don’t have an exact view that shows the puck over, but when you look at it… You can look where it is under the skate, and you feel that you can’t prove that the call is wrong.
“The issue I have with this is I don’t understand how they could – like, there’s no official behind the net there. Like, how can you say that that puck is conclusively [in]?”
MORE: Connor McDavid’s silence on injury adds worry after Oilers’ Game 4 defeat
The overtime moment came just 2:29 in when Ryan Poehling fired a sharp-angle shot that slipped under goaltender Tristan Jarry. Officials hesitated before confirming it as a goal, leading to a long video review. The call stood, pushing Anaheim to a 3-1 series lead.
Friedman raised a bigger concern about positioning. “It looks in, but you can’t tell a hundred percent,” he noted.
“I just don’t understand how, without someone behind the net, you could say that’s a good goal,” Friedman added.
Ron MacLean on the goal line
Host Ron MacLean added that the goal line itself is unclear on replay angles, making judgment harder.
“The goal line is kind of muddy along the edge,” MacLean said. “You can see it’s not a hard, definitive line, and the puck, I mean – depending on camera angles.”
Friedman then suggested the league needs better tools, but still questioned the decision to overturn the initial ruling.
“This is another call for some form of tracking technology that can solve this problem for everybody, but like Ron, it’s like you got to be able to overturn the call, and based on those replays, you can’t overturn the call on the ice.”
Oilers coach questioned the OT goal ruling
Speaking about the OT goal, Edmonton coach Kris Knoblauch said he could not see the puck fully cross the line.
“I can’t see it going in. I can’t see the line,” the Oilers’ coach said. “… The [initial] goal call on the ice was probably about 60 to 90 seconds after, maybe even more. They huddled when they got to center ice, and then they made the [initial] call that it was a good goal. Wasn’t very definitive.”
MORE: Elliotte Friedman highlights biggest disadvantage for Oilers after Game 3 loss
Beyond the controversy, the Ducks again made a strong comeback. Jeffrey Viel tied the game 3-3 late in regulation, after the Ducks initially made the game 2-2 in the second period. Anaheim has now scored 20 goals in four games and holds firm control of the series.
Game 5 now shifts to Edmonton, where the Oilers must respond to stay alive in the series.
Q&A
What was the controversy surrounding the Oilers' Game 4 overtime goal?
The controversy involved a disputed overtime goal that led to the Oilers' loss, with doubts raised about the review process and the lack of conclusive evidence.
Who questioned the ruling on the overtime goal in the Oilers' Game 4 loss?
Elliotte Friedman questioned the ruling during a Sportsnet broadcast after the game.
What did Elliotte Friedman say about the review process for the disputed goal?
Friedman stated that the call on the ice could only be overturned with conclusive evidence, which was lacking in this case.
How did the lack of an official behind the net impact the goal review?
Friedman highlighted that without an official behind the net, it was difficult to conclusively determine whether the puck was in, raising further doubts about the ruling.
