ShareThis Page
Penguins

Goal by Penguins' Zach Aston-Reese changed to Kris Letang

Jonathan Bombulie
| Friday, Feb. 16, 2018, 7:06 p.m.
Penguins defenseman Kris Letang gathers the puck in front of the Kings' Andy Andreoff in the first period Tuesday, Feb. 5, 2018, at PPG Paints Arena.
Chaz Palla | Tribune-Review
Penguins defenseman Kris Letang gathers the puck in front of the Kings' Andy Andreoff in the first period Tuesday, Feb. 5, 2018, at PPG Paints Arena.
The Kings' Dion Phaneuf defends on the Penguins' Phil Kessel in the third period Tuesday, Feb. 5, 2018 at PPG Paints Arena.
Chaz Palla | Tribune-Review
The Kings' Dion Phaneuf defends on the Penguins' Phil Kessel in the third period Tuesday, Feb. 5, 2018 at PPG Paints Arena.

Rookie winger Zach Aston-Reese went to bed Thursday night with three career NHL goals. He woke up Friday with two.

A video review at NHL headquarters Friday morning showed the winning goal in Thursday's 3-1 Penguins victory over Los Angeles did not hit Aston-Reese's skate on its way to the back of the net. The goal was credited to Kris Letang instead.

Aston-Reese said he was fine with the scoring change and insisted he wasn't just saying that as a show of rookie humility.

“I've been around long enough where I know that stuff evens out over time,” Aston-Reese said. “I didn't even know it went off of me and I told Tanger that.”

Jonathan Bombulie is a Tribune-Review staff writer. Reach him at jbombulie@tribweb.com or via Twitter @BombulieTrib.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com 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.

click me