The NHL managed to spark another familiar argument Wednesday night, and this time the flash point came on Gabriel Landeskog’s disallowed goal in the Colorado Avalanche’s 3-2 shootout loss to the Dallas Stars at Ball Arena.
The play happened in the first period. Jaden Schwartz fired a one-timer that hit Stars goalie Casey DeSmith’s pads, then ricocheted off Landeskog just below his right knee and into the net. The goal stood for a moment, then replay officials in Toronto wiped it out, ruling that Landeskog had directed the puck into the net with a distinct kicking motion.
That’s where the frustration starts. The league’s wording makes the standard sound clean and obvious, but the replay process told a different story. If officials need multiple looks to sort out whether a motion is truly distinct, then the evidence is doing a lot less work than the rule implies.
Seen in slow motion, Landeskog’s skate does move forward. Seen at full speed, though, it looks much harder to call it an intentional kick.
Hockey happens fast, and this one unfolded in a split second. Landeskog was reacting to a bouncing puck in real time, not setting up some deliberate move to shove it over the line.
Landeskog pushed back on the idea that he could have consciously kicked it in. Asked whether he thought the call was fair, he drew the line between slow-motion replay and live action:
“If you watch it in real speed, there’s no chance I can react to that and kick that puck,” Landeskog explained. “When you watch a slow-mo, it looks like a kick motion, maybe. But if you’re watching real time, there’s just, like, I have it lifted already, and I go to plant it, to skate.”
That gets to the heart of the argument. There’s a real difference between a player deliberately kicking a puck into the net and a puck deflecting off a skate while the player is simply trying to recover his footing. If the NHL wants to keep overturning goals in these situations, it has to be clearer about where that line sits.
One fix would be to stop leaning on the word distinct. If the rule just referenced a kicking motion, the debate would be simpler, even if the judgment would still be contentious. As it stands, the word distinct suggests something unmistakable, and this play never felt unmistakable.
That’s why the call landed as another inconsistency fans know too well. These decisions have a way of feeling different from game to game, which is exactly what turns them into recurring talking points. The league has seen this movie before, and it will almost certainly see it again.
Still, the game itself was far from a one-note complaint. Both teams had chances, and the matchup was competitive from start to finish before Dallas eventually won in the shootout.
The disallowed goal mattered, because goals always matter. But it was not the only reason the Avalanche lost.
That doesn’t remove the need for scrutiny. The bigger issue is whether the NHL got this call right and whether its rules are being applied the same way every night. Fans, players and coaches deserve more clarity than a replay decision that still looks debatable after repeated viewings.
The NHL needs to explain the standard and show how it is being used. Otherwise, the league is leaving everyone to argue over the same vague language, and the same controversial plays, over and over again.
In this case, the call looked wrong. And unless the NHL sharpens the rule and enforces it more consistently, this debate is coming back soon.
In Other News...
Cale Makar Shares Personal Update After Brief Avalanche Absence
Cale Makar is back with the Avalanche after stepping away for a game to be with his family for the birth of his twin sons, Mattie and Rhett. The star defenseman returned to the lineup and looked right at home in his usual role, logging 28 shifts and nearly 23 minutes of ice time as Colorado got back to business with one of its most important players available again.
Makar said his family is healthy, a welcome update after a brief absence that had little to do with hockey but plenty to do with life. For Avalanche fans, it was another reminder that the cornerstone piece of the roster is as settled off the ice as he is on it, especially after signing his eight-year deal last offseason and making clear he wants to spend his career in Colorado. [Read more 🡒]
Hakstols Sudden Avalanche Exit Raises An Obvious Timing Question
Dave Hakstols sudden departure from the Avalanche staff came soon after Jared Bednar signed a four-year contract extension, giving the move a natural layer of intrigue even before the explanation surfaced. Hakstol has already moved on to take the head coaching job at Arizona State, stepping into a program that is dealing with its own significant challenges after a recent player health incident.
For Colorado, the timing is what stands out most because it invites questions about how much of this was about opportunity and how much was about the way the coaching picture had just shifted in Denver. There has been speculation about the reasons behind Hakstols exit, but nothing has been confirmed, leaving the Avalanche with a notable change on the bench and one obvious thread still hanging. [Read more 🡒]
Brent Burns Is Still Chasing The One Prize Colorado Wants Most
Brent Burns has become one of the steadier veteran pieces on Colorados blue line, bringing 23 NHL seasons of experience and a rare durability that still stands out in todays game. After signing a one-year extension in June, he settled in as a dependable presence for the Avalanche, adding depth and offering the kind of edge that only comes from having seen just about everything over the course of a long career.
Burns also kept producing at the offensive end, finishing the 2025-26 season with 12 goals and 23 assists while extending his place in NHL history with the second-longest consecutive games played streak at 1,012. For a team still chasing the Stanley Cup, his value goes beyond the numbers. Colorado gets a veteran who can log minutes, provide stability and keep pushing toward the one prize that continues to define the season. [Read more 🡒]