Bruins-Blues Stanley Cup Final Game 6 could hinge on officiating |

Bruins-Blues Stanley Cup Final Game 6 could hinge on officiating

Associated Press
Blues center Ivan Barbashev moves the puck ahead of Bruins left wing Marcus Johansson during the third period of Game 3 of the Stanley Cup Final on Saturday, June 1, 2019, in St. Louis.

ST. LOUIS — Patrick Maroon doesn’t want to go there. Not even about how the St. Louis Blues handle the roller coaster of inconsistent officiating.

“I’m not talking about it,” the usually talkative Maroon said. “If you want to talk about Game 6, I’ll talk about Game 6.”

Except the St. Louis Blues and Boston Bruins are so tight that Game 6 of the Stanley Cup Final is absolutely in danger of hinging on officiating. It might not necessarily be a missed call like the one that helped the Blues win Game 5 and put them on the verge of winning the Cup. It could simply be how much leeway the referees give the Blues and Bruins in the next chapter of what has been a series of big hits and more than a little animosity.

“It’s tough to say,” Blues coach Craig Berube said. “It’s important for our team to just deal with it.”

Berube and Boston coach Bruce Cassidy have voiced their displeasure to the referees at various points, which is no surprise given this has been the postseason of officiating mishaps. Changes are likely coming to video review and how the NHL handles these situations moving forward, but none of that will affect the Blues and Bruins on Sunday night, when the Stanley Cup could get wheeled onto the ice for a celebration or put on a plane back to Boston for Game 7.

“We’re going to focus on playing the game,” Berube said. “It goes both ways. There’s calls either way that could be made, and some are made and some aren’t made.”

It has gone every which way. Vegas was on the wrong end of an incorrect major penalty that contributed to losing Game 7 to San Jose in the first round; the Blues lost to the Sharks in overtime in Game 3 of the Western Conference final on a missed hand pass violation and St. Louis benefited from a stunning non-call on Tyler Bozak tripping Noel Acciari in Game 5 against Boston.

Even before the missed tripping call, Game 5 alone was a study in how fast the game has gotten and how even the best referees in the world miss what should be obvious penalties. Blues forward Ivan Barbashev’s illegal check to the head of Bruins forward Marcus Johansson wasn’t penalized that night, though it drew a suspension for Game 6, and St. Louis’ Zach Sanford got an elbow up on Boston’s Torey Krug that went uncalled.

“You’re going to get calls where you like them or you don’t like them, throughout the whole playoffs if not throughout the whole season, so you don’t really worry about the officiating,” Blues forward Brayden Schenn said Saturday. “It’s just wasting energy. Those guys are the best at what they do. They have a tough job. So I don’t think you worry about calls going your way or against you.”

There have been enough gaffes in all four rounds that no team can reasonably think the officials are biased against them. Mistakes happen, of course, even if that doesn’t make it sting any less after a blown call contributes to a loss.

A frustrated Cassidy declared after Game 5 that “The National Hockey League’s getting a black-eye with their officiating in these playoffs.”

It’s enough of an issue commissioner Gary Bettman addressed it in his annual state of the league speech before Game 1. He said expanded video review will be a topic of discussion this offseason with input from general managers, the competition committee and the Officials Association.

“No one should doubt that we want to get it right,” Bettman said May 27. “This is not an excuse. We’re not whining about it. It’s simply a recognition of a challenge which we will address sensibly, appropriately and in the best interest of the game.”

It’s too late for Vegas, but it’s not too late for Boston to overcome a missed call like St. Louis did with the hand pass. Just don’t expect it to be used outwardly as a rallying cry.

“It’s not going to be brought up in the locker room,” Cassidy said. “Our play should define us, not a call. It will be part of the message.”

Knowing what it’s like to bounce back from feeling as if they were cheated out of a victory could help the Blues understand the Bruins’ psychology. But mostly they expect their opponent to go all out to avoid elimination and keep the series going.

“I think the big motivation for them has got to be they’re down 3-2,” Blues defenseman Carl Gunnarsson said. “Regardless of the call or not, we won the game and they’re going to come in here being down. I think they’re going to be a desperate team. They have to be. That’s what we expect. They’re going to come out full blast, and we’ve just got to be expecting that.”

Categories: Sports | NHL
TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.