“I disagree with the call,” Quenneville said. “Your intention’s to blow the whistle. . . . You don’t blow the whistle because the puck goes over the goal line. His intention was to blow the puck dead before the puck went in, plus the guy jumps on the goalie. Interference! Blow the whistle at that time of the game. It was a ridiculous non-call and I’m upset.”

more at the Denver Post…

Posted by Paul from Motown Area on 02/05/08 at 08:00 AM ET

the whistle blew, but the ref behind the net was pointing to the puck in the back of the net.  Not the best call, but it was a goal.

Posted by bsalamon on 02/05/08 at 08:37 AM ET

that was not a goal.

1: The ref lost sight of the puck for a few seconds.
2: Doan’s stick was broken and he still played the puck.
3: He hit the puck in with his glove…. look at the momentum of the puck after it was frozen.
4: the ref blew the whistle.

Also very unsportsmen like conduct on Gretzky and all of the Coyotes for leaving the bench when they knew it was going to be reviewed. Which by the way was not even really reviewed.

Posted by Chris from Denver on 02/05/08 at 08:49 AM ET

You call THAT a no goal?  Listen, let me tell you a story about Hull in the Stanley Cup playoffs…

Posted by Ben from Buffalo, NY on 02/05/08 at 10:51 AM ET

Too close to call. I don’t see Doan touch the puck but if he did then it should be no goal.

Posted by Sp4r7an on 02/05/08 at 11:23 AM ET

Long time for the whistle to go. I’ve seen much closer calls then this come back so I’m not sure how this one counted.

Posted by Sp4r7an on 02/05/08 at 11:24 AM ET

A game winning overtime goal that initiates in the paint, and people are asking the question if it’s reviewable?

Every goal in the paint should be reviewed.

Posted by Tapeleg on 02/05/08 at 11:37 AM ET