Josh Nelson

I haven't commented on this until now. "Logic" all of a sudden enters the equation as a valid means for calling goals "good", despite overwhelming history to the contrary. Some simple facts from this goal: - No official was in position to make this call on the ice, it should have been ruled no goal on the ice. That's just the facts. No ref was below the hash marks or anywhere close enough to conclusively call it in. No signal was made to this effect. Positioning failure should not result in one team being effectively penalized for that. - When such cases are ruled no goal on the ice, you need overwhelming conclusive evidence the puck completely crossed the line. Last I checked AI removals of objects and drawing circles around the puck aren't part of the situation rooms process. - If the league has a additional view that was used in this decision, that should be publicized. - It is my opinion that this puck completely crossed the line, but based on how these calls have historically gone, the process that has been used until now was tossed in the trashcan. So while the calls result is ultimately what we want from the on-ice product, the process that has been used up until now was completely thrown out the window. The league has a bit of soul-searching to do here and I believe this is a reasonable point to be perturbed with from the Oilers perspective. You can get the call right, and the process wrong, which means they need to change the process. Changing it on game 86 of the season is not the time.