He went on to imply that the no-call and Vegas\u2019 subsequent goal was the game-deciding play.<\/p>\n
\u201cWe looked like we could have slowed down playing. I haven\u2019t really looked at it afterward. I was just upset about the call at that time. But that was the play for me,\u201d Quenneville said.<\/p>\n
LaCombe echoed a similar sentiment to that of his coach, though he refused to use it as an excuse for the team\u2019s loss: \u201cAt the time I thought it was an [icing], but you just got to keep playing hockey. Doesn\u2019t mean I can make a soft play after that. That\u2019s how it is.\u201d<\/p>\n
Here\u2019s a look at that icing no-call\u2014you can see Quenneville nearly barrel over one of his own players in the box as he disputed the decision from the referees:<\/p>\n
Quenneville was FURIOUS that icing wasn’t called on Vegas’ 2nd goal \ud83d\ude33\ud83e\udd2c pic.twitter.com\/383fIjH7fa<\/a><\/p>\n \u2014 B\/R Open Ice (@BR_OpenIce) May 5, 2026<\/a><\/p>\n The Ducks have every right to be pissed. <\/p>\n Barbashev is clearly short of the red line and LaCombe looks to be in a favorable position of Eichel. <\/p>\n Certainly a controversial call pic.twitter.com\/3Aukl8qfIv<\/a><\/p>\n \u2014 Jonny Lazarus (@JLazzy23) May 5, 2026<\/a>Why icing wasn\u2019t called before Golden Knights\u2019 go-ahead goal vs. Ducks in Game 1 of playoff series<\/p>\n Why wasn\u2019t icing called on the play? Under the NHL\u2019s hybrid icing rules, the linesman has discretion over when to blow the whistle for icing based on how the play unfolds. If the defending player looks like he will reach the puck first by the time both players reach the face-off dots, play is stopped; if the attacking player has a chance to reach the puck first, the linesman may keep the whistle in his pocket.<\/p>\n Basically, it comes down to body positioning and who the linesman thinks will touch the puck first. In replay videos, it looked like LaCombe had the favorable position, but he may have hesitated and slowed his skating for just a second, leading to the no-call. <\/p>\n ESPN rules analyst Dave Jackson explained why the linesman may have waved off the icing call<\/a> during the broadcast: \u201cWhat people don\u2019t realize, it\u2019s not a race to the dot. It\u2019s not the first player to get to the dot. The linesman has to make a decision at the dot as to who he thinks will get to the puck first. If you see that angle, the Vegas player seems to have a step on the Anaheim player. His judgement right there is that the Anaheim player stopped skating, puts his arm out, and the Vegas player would win the race to the puck. That\u2019s why he waved it off.\u201d<\/p>\n The Golden Knights are set to host the Ducks for Game 2 of the series on Wednesday night. Hopefully the men in stripes don\u2019t become an unwanted storyline in that one, and Anaheim gets its fair chance to even the series.<\/p>\n More from Sports Illustrated![\"\"](\"https:\/\/assets.minutemediacdn.com\/platform\/google_discover_icon.svg\"){kind=icon}
Add us as a preferred source on GoogleFollow<\/a>