Brock Nelson and the Americans did well to bounce back from a goalie interference call on some pretty soft contact that disallowed one of their goals. But the IIHF's black-and-white rule is better than the NHL's interpretation of goalie interference.
Team USA netminder Connor Hellebuyck was blunt when discussing the difference between how the IIHF and NHL call goalie interference.
"Well, they're different every year in the NHL, too. So who knows?" Hellebuyck told reporters.
Of the debated penalties and non-calls in these Olympics so far, the goalie interference ruling that overturned one of the Americans' goals against Latvia on Thursday was arguably the most discussed. It called into question the standard when it comes to enforcing the rule in the NHL and in international hockey. And while the NHL interpretation of the rule has been tough to figure out, the IIHF interpretation is crystal clear, and that's how we like it.
Hellebuyck watched from other end of the ice as Latvia challenged Brock Nelson's goal in the first period. The ruling was that American forward J.T. Miller of the New York Rangers made slight contact in the crease with Latvian goalie Elvis Merzlikins of the Columbus Blue Jackets.
It was the second goal of the period that Latvia successfully challenged, with the other one being offside.
It wasn't as if Miller completely bowled over Merzlikins, but even a small degree of contact was deemed to be something that impairs the netminder's fair ability to stop the puck.
This is where there's a slight difference between the IIHF's interpretation of goalie interference and the NHL's way of dealing with it.
For example, there was a similar goal that was allowed on Jan. 13 between the New York Islanders and Winnipeg Jets in which Nino Niederreiter appeared to make slight contact with Ilya Sorokin's blocker in the crease.
In another instance, on Dec. 3 between the Washington Capitals and San Jose Sharks, Hendrix Lapierre appears to make contact with Yaroslav Askarov in the crease, but the goal counted because the officials ruled it did not impair the goalie's ability to position himself in the crease.
The IIHF officials, meanwhile, have zero tolerance for contact in the crease and can blow play dead if they see an attacker establishing position in the blue paint, Sportsnet's Elliotte Friedman said. The IIHF rulebook essentially says if an attacking player initiates contact in the crease with a goalie, incidental or otherwise, with any part of the body or stick, and a goal is scored, the goal will be disallowed.
The IIHF/Olympic interpretation of the rule is the better one if people want to see more objectivity in these goalie interference calls, even if it leads to some arguably softer calls, such as the one on Thursday.
Sure, there's an argument to be made for allowing some unintentional contact in scoring plays around the net. Not every bump is meant to injure or impede a goalie's ability to stop the puck.
But once you introduce degrees of contact when you're drawing a line for players, you introduce subjectivity to the process. It's far easier to call a rule when there's black-and-white lines laid out that tell players where they cannot cross.
That was the case with Miller's contact with Merzlikins. Miller was clearly in the crease and made contact with the goaltender, and that made calling that play very straightforward during the video review. Nobody needed to make the argument Miller was outside the crease or didn't make significant enough contact.
If you did allow that play to be legal, it would soon enough be open season on goalies, and at that point, there could be injuries that affect the outcome of an entire best-on-best tournament. So we'd say the Olympics officials got that call right.
Fortunately for Nelson, he scored two goals later in the game, and the Americans played well in spite of two calls going against them in the 5-1 win.
Other sports do a solid job of protecting their players. The NFL, for example, has taken many measures over the years to protect their quarterbacks. Hockey needs to protect its goalies as best it can. And the way you do that is with a firm hand in calling goalie interference.
Yes, that firm hand and a soft but correct call could be the difference between winning or losing a championship if a similar situation arises later in the tournament. The opposite can be true as well.
So don't fault the IIHF officials for their judgement in the U.S. and Latvia game. They know how plainly the rule is laid out, and they did their job by adhering to it.
For action-packed issues, access to the entire magazine archive and a free issue, subscribe to The Hockey News at THN.com/free. Get the latest news and trending stories by subscribing to our newsletter here. And share your thoughts by commenting below the article on THN.com or creating your own post in our community forum.