It's not just hockey, but I think replay is kinda flawed in all sports. That puck was obviously over the line. I understand the desire for conclusive evidence, but I wish they'd slightly lower the bar to allow for some common sense on situations like this. You don't have to be able to see the puck to know it's in the net. There's nowhere else it could have been.
I'm not sure how to word a rule that lowers that burden without creating more unintended consequences though.
I think there's a case to be made there, but the problem is that "common sense" is subjective. So the only way to take human subjectivity out of it (and placate biased fan bases of both teams involved) is to rely on the only objective measure- video evidence of the puck over the line.
Now, that said, here's a hypothetical- what is the difference between this situation and the situation when a goalie makes a glove save (ref calls no goal) but video review shows the glove was over the goal line. Ref reverses the call and makes it a goal. We've all seen it happen, right? If that is a goal, why was the one the other night not a goal?
Because one pad never crossed the goal line and the puck could have been under that pad. When it's a glove, it's really clear if the glove crossed the line with the puck in it. I never saw anything showing the puck anywhere in the net, in this instance. Don't even know from where the puck was retrieved. Which would have been a relevant factor. I know - common sense says it was under the goalie with most of the goalie in the net, but with nothing to prove that... makes it a very difficult case.
What was more egregious to me was the non-call when Schenn was clearly tripped in OT. 2 officials - only 6 skaters are on the ice. All of them are on one side of the blueline and neither sees a blatant trip? WTH were they watching??