That should have been a no goal. How can the referee not lose sight of the puck if it's in his pants? The whistle should have been blown as soon as the ref lost sight. Even if he saw it go in there, it doesn't mean he can see the puck. Bad call.
Difference is that if a ref saw the puck go into his jersey/pants and chose not to blow the whistle then it stands. He knows where the puck is he just can't see it. No one will ever know for sure why a whistle didn't get blown but watching the play makes me think that the ref with the best sightline had a good idea that it was wrapped up in Smith somewhere and no one wants to blow a whistle in OT with a potential scoring play still going on. If there was no intent and the puck goes in the net the goal counts.
- Hockeymom1960 likes this