Times Colonist

Controvers­y abounds as U.S. wins women’s hockey gold medal

-

ESPOO, Finland — The Internatio­nal Ice Hockey Federation offered an explanatio­n Monday for the decision to waive off what would have been the gold medal-winning goal by Finland in the host country’s shootout loss to the United States in the women’s world hockey championsh­ip game.

The IIHF, which had a video judge review every goal during the tournament, cited two rules in saying the goal by Petra Nieminen at 11:33 of overtime was disallowed due to non-incidental goaltender interferen­ce.

Nieminen’s goal sparked a wild celebratio­n on Sunday as jubilant fans cheered what would have been Finland’s first championsh­ip in its first appearance in the title game.

After a lengthy video review, the goal was called back.

Finland captain Jenni Hiirikoski had made contact with American goaltender Alex Rigsby, who was moving out of her crease, as she passed in front of the net. Hiirikoski wasn’t assessed a goaltender interferen­ce penalty, but Rigsby was given a tripping minor.

The IIHF said the video judge weighed two rules in making the decision to waive off the goal.

One states: “An attacking skater who makes contact other than incidental with a goaltender who is out of his goal crease during game action will be assessed a minor penalty for interferen­ce. If a goal is scored at this time, it will not count.” The other states: “Incidental contact is allowed when the goaltender is in the act of playing the puck outside his goal crease, provided the attacking skater makes a reasonable effort to minimize or avoid such contact.”

Once the goal was waived off, the referees decided to uphold the tripping penalty. The Americans killed off two penalties in overtime before winning the game in a shootout as dispirited fans watched their devastated team await their runner-up honours.

Finnish Ice Hockey Federation chief executive officer Matti Nurminen said referees planned to give a penalty to Rigsby for tripping and were allowing the goal.

“But when it goes to video review, the power and authority goes [to] the video-goal judges,” he said after the game. “They saw it as goalie interferen­ce and made that decision.”

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from Canada