Rod Brind'Amour Rips NHL For Bruins' Second Goal: 'This Is Why The League's A Joke'

By Michael Hurley, CBS Boston

BOSTON (CBS) -- When the officials on the ice ruled a good goal for the Bruins in the second period of Wednesday's playoff game between Boston and Carolina, Hurricanes head coach Rod Brind'Amour was heated.

When Brind'Amour lost his challenge, he was doubly heated.

And after ultimately losing 4-3 in double overtime to fall behind 1-0 in the series, well, you guessed it. Rod Brind'Amour was heated.

As a result, he's likely to be a little lighter in the wallet come Thursday morning.

"This is why the league's a joke, in my opinion, on these things," Brind'Amour told The News & Observer. "That one is a crime scene."

Crime scene? Slightly strong language, to be sure. Nevertheless, Brind'Amour has a case that his team got a raw deal when the officials on the ice ruled that Petr Mrazek never covered the puck prior to Nick Ritchie batting it free and Charlie Coyle scoring a goal. Brind'Amour said he was unhappy with the referees' explanation on both the covering of the puck and a potential hand pass by Ritchie, and as such, it led to quite a mess for the man behind the bench.

"They came to me, and I said, 'If he has possession of it then it's goalie interference. If he doesn't have possession then it's a hand pass. It's one of the two. I don't know what you're calling on the ice,'" Brind'Amour said, according to the News & Observer. "All he has to do is tell me. 'We're calling it nonpossession (by Mrazek),' then we're challenging a glove-hand pass. If it's possession, then goaltender interference. I said, 'Tell me the call on the ice.' They wouldn't do it when I say, 'What is the call?' So I had to flip a coin [on what to challenge."

Brind'Amour used some colorful language to describe the officials in the booth working the video reviews, too.

""he guys up there that aren't putting any sweat equity into this game decide the game. It's wrong," Brind'Amour told The Athletic's Sara Civian. "He doesn't tell me what the call on the ice is? If it's not a glove-hand pass I would've said OK, then that's [bleeping] goalie interference."

Again, Brind'Amour has a strong case, especially if the on-ice officials failed to properly explain themselves in the moment. Still, the league doesn't take too kindly to such talk from anyone, let alone a head coach in the midst of a playoff series.

A fine for Brind'Amour is inevitable. Whether or not his tangent results in some tangible changes to the officiating on the ice? We'll all find out together in Game 2 on Thursday night.

In:
• NHL