Barn Burner: Boomer & Pinder with Rhett Warrener - Edmonton Oilers Fans Are LOSING IT Right Now 😂 | BB Clips

Episode Date: April 27, 2026

Boomer, Pinder and Rhett react to absolute disaster for the Edmonton Oilers after falling behind 3-1 in the series to the Ducks in heartbreaking fashion. After blowing multiple leads, Edmonton watched Anaheim complete yet another comeback before a controversial overtime winner ended it, sending Oilers fans into full panic mode. The guys dive into the disputed goal, the Oilers’ inability to close games, and how a team that was in back-to-back Stanley Cup Finals now suddenly looks on the verge of a shocking first-round collapse—so did the Oilers get robbed, or have they done this to themselves?Video Link: https://youtu.be/jju_CQm7qjE#nhl #nhlshorts #nhlplayoffs #nhlpredictions #nhlhockey #nhlpicks #stanleycup #stanleycupfinal #edmontonoilers #edmonton CHECK OUT OUR STUFF ⬇️BARN BURNER MERCHhttps://nationgear.ca/collections/shirts/FlamesnationBARN BURNER SHORTS https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PLj_bcGtvvo-cW2DHEDZ6dEO5ePDmlhZc9&si=jo8iNGxT4ImhS2Y8📲 Follow us:Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/fnbarnburner/X (Twitter): https://x.com/barnburnerfn?lang=en🎧 Listen on:Apple Podcasts: https://podcasts.apple.com/be/podcast/barn-burner-boomer-pinder-with-rhett-warrener/id1648562889Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/show/3Mc6Qd5U22R2zbMlQ7RxIiProducer: Jack Haverstock Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

The Ebbets and Oilers led to nothing. And three to two. Off to a hot start, but the ducks. Quack. Fighting back. Get up to overtime. And we're going to be in for a long, lengthy overtime? Not so much as we take a lot.

Oh, show me this, please. What happened? That's what's been effective. He's the best. Tassie, the world. Good stick by McTavish. Pailing. Granger Rock, and he's looking around.

He's fine. And I just want an overtime. Oh. What is this? The officials are hooking this over. They couldn't find a Jari was looking around. Oh. That's not in the ass.

It's going. Mark. Mark. Keep moving, puck. Oh. Oh. Oh, no. At the iPad, at the penalty box,

Ariets. After review, the puck completely crossed the goal. What the fuck? Beautiful stuff. Yes, it did. It sure did, guys. It absolutely did. Yeah.

Great play. Great play. I'm just glad this happened in Anahon. Like, there would have been a thousand fights in Emerson last night if that happened. It probably was anyway. There would be anyway. Probably was anyway. So I hate controversial goals, dude.

Would you say this is one? Not my world. There is some controversy. I don't know if it's about whether the puck was in or not, because the puck's a circle and you can see where that circle's going to stop. It's not on the line. But the controversy is about the process of how the refs arrived there. Wow, it's cool.

That's all that matters. That's all that matters. I feel bad for the cultural capital. Festival City. Shelbyville. You've three games to one. You still got a chance. Played well.

Who's in net? Tristan Jari. Oh, good. Charger. Giving everybody a chance then. Yeah. Pick her next. Is that they roll?

Isn't that what our idiot? That's what we were told. He should have started this game, actually. That's what we would. Okay. So he was good until that Darnell nurse own goal you just watched. Is that Darnell putting it in? Off the heel.

I don't think he meant to. That's. Brian paling meant it to either. Let's see it all again, do you? Yeah, I'd be kind of missed those watch. Because I was definitely sleeping. I told myself, go to bed because no matter what happens, you won't be able to sleep. Yeah, it is too happy or too upset.

Exactly. Ecstatic or pissed right off. So it is early, obviously, two and a half into the overtime. They just throw it on. And they're actually, here's the thing. Yeah, yeah, because there's not going to be a whole lot of oil or love at the table. sympathy. Jerry was fine in this game.

He was quite good. Yeah. Anaheim does score four. There's no empty netters. They score four, but Jerry had made some saves, Jari, including one off of Cutter Goce earlier. I think it was right before that faceoff in overtime. The issue is, and so many people have talked about it, and I guess we will as well.

You see where the refs are. There's one on screen. The other ref is way back there. The other two are nowhere. to be found. It doesn't even point. This is called. It's not made the call yet. Yeah, there's no call. There's no call here.

And so the ducks are like, just sally like it's in. We think it was in. And they actually start going down the tunnel at one point before the call's even made. So in my, in my mind, because of, it's kind of like the, if it's close on an offside, just let it go, let the play develop. If a goal goes in, then we'll go to instant. replay and then we'll let it's like calling the five minute major and you can always knock it down to a two we're seeing it all the time we saw it in a number of times this weekend call the penalty call it a five then we get to look at it and determine what it is so that in the end it's kind of a circuitous route to get to the right call the right call but people are having issues here the call on the ice is a goal so my guess they get together call it a goal because then they'll go to the replay and we'll get we would all do the same thing we would all do the same thing same thing. I think in that

hang on. Because unlike the five minute rule, if you call this no one still. I'm getting it. Like I am getting the only problem is here when you call it a goal you need to have evidence to overturn it. Which you would think we're going to replay.

It'll be clear. We'll have a great look at it. We'll be totally off the hook. It takes it out of our hands. Everyone will see what it is. It's like, ooh. It's not conclusive in the sense of you can clearly see what it is because of that bloody skate blade, which is crazy. Yeah. And I think logically we know it's crossed the line based on it being a circle and the line being straight. But our understanding of the rulebook

and how it's been used is that, well, you need the video to show the white between the puck. Let's take a look at a circle. What does a circle look like? We'll start with that one, Jack. So a puck is a circle, we believe. So this is what a puck looks. So that's a circle. So that's a circle, okay. And that's kind of, sorry, I meant to crop this. I can't believe what I didn't crop it. I just grab it quick. So that's the Gary Betman.

That's a Stanley. That's the whole thing. It's a playoff puck. So we know what the puck. So then if you were to take that puck. Right. And kind of keep it to scale. Keep it a circle.

And put it over top of, you know, kind of overlay it. That's what it may, may look like. So there would be just. That still looks like a circle. That has to, yeah. Yeah, it feels like there would be a. smidge of a hair. I don't know what kind of hair, but a hair of some sort. A thick

hair, yeah. That would fit between the edge of the puck and can we zoom in that at all? Or is that just as that as ties again? Also not cropped. I don't know what I was. I just grab it. Oh, I'll crop it later. Look at here I am in the middle of the show. I'm so excited. Quack. Just ask AI if it was

what do we think about Jerry's shoelace work there? That's an old school. It is old school. I have not seen the triple under in a long time. That's a weird. So, So if we can do it for even a second, the Euler fans feel like what the age? How is this called a goal when no ref was in position? And the one guy who was the closest certainly made no motion to suggest it was a goal.

Two things can be true. The officials can definitely not have been in position to call this goal and that was a mistake. And they also can get the call right, which is what the league did because it's in. It's amazing because this is a mistake. all of it either. If you call that a goal, mistake, because they were no position and called, they couldn't see that.

No, they're both both the goal line. And the, and the linesmen are halfway up the walls and jerry's a large man with padding on and that's right under his skating. No, and if you call it no goal, it was a goal. If you do this sort of thing, it's in. It's crazy to think that, because that,

just in my mind, that's the thought process. Call it a goal. That's what they do. then they'll look at it. And it will get clear. And the right call will be made. And it was, but yet still. But again, like, they're still going to look at it if they call it no goal. That's, like, that's the part that's not adding up to me.

Like, they could just as they say, well, call it no goal, we're going to look at video anyway. It's not like if you call it no goal, you can't review it. That's why they use the fives because you can't review unless it's a five. They would have reviewed this. Yeah. They're reviewing either way. And that's, uh, because the league would have called in and said, whoa, whoa, we, we, Hey, hey.

And what I don't know the answer to is if this had been called no goal on the ice, can we play the circle line game and know that it's in or do we need the video with the white? I don't know. I'll bet you. Because we know it's in. Like we just showed you the- Whatever. I think it was the call on the ice that determined the outcome of the game.

So you think if that's called no goal, it stays no goal. I think they find a way to call that a goal given we know that based that it's flat on the ice. It's not in the air where that distorts the angles with the camera. And we know that it's a perfect circle. know that the line's straight. We know it's crossed that line, but I am curious, does the league give themselves the leeway to say, because we know it's over.

There's no way that did not cross the line, but there isn't a picture of it. It's still very close. It's close, but it's clear. It's not like when, say, the goalie makes the gloves save and the gloves behind the line and you can't see the puck. Well, it's clearly in. They can't see the puck.

But wouldn't you, sorry, I'm not. If you can't see the puck in the goalie's glove and you know the goalie's gloves behind, do they call it a goal? Well, if any part of the glove is touching the line, you could argue that that's where the puck could be in the block. But again, I think it is there. We see enough of the puck that we know where the other end is. I know why you want to argue this part of it. I'm just saying to have a little bit of if like that's a comparison. If that goal he catches a puck and it is in his glove and you can't see it.

I don't know. Do they call that a goal? If the whole glove, we know the puck is in, crosses the line? Yes. But what if a portion of the glove does? Well, then we don't. But this is not a, we don't exactly where this is under the skate. This is the same.

It's not the same thing because he's saying we can't see it in the glove. You can't see it. But we know where the end of the puck is because it's a circle. I understand. Like, I agree. You cannot see it. I can. We should take this off because we're showing it.

I can, I would say this. If I'm an Oilers fan, they have a legitimate beef. There is a legitimate beat. You will have a skewed and you have to be. I agree with it. There's a mistake in the process there. I do think they get the call right. But there was the process.

I agree with they got the call right as well. But I don't know. I think the puck was in. But by rule of law, I don't know if they did it right. I agreed. Yeah, I think we're all on the same page here. Which is why it's a mistake either way.

There is a no win situation for the NHL because they're too stubborn to do the right thing with the tracking technology. Yeah. Like we're literally getting, we're getting tennis players serving the ball at like 200 kilometers an hour. And you have replays where it touches on the ground good to within like a hundredth of an inch. Like how do we not have cameras on each side of the post or something in the puck?

There's one camera that isn't in the rafters and it's blocked by a blade. Like, come on guys. You're a $5 to $6 billion league annually. Put cameras going each way across the goal line from the bottom of the post. It's not that hard. Then it's like, oh, there's this, yeah, we can see, look, there's a gap. There's no way there's not a technology that could figure that oath.

They're too stubborn to do it. What I'm curious about is would the NHL, based on the circle line, allow themselves to call it a goal or not? Because that would feel like a stretching of what they've done in the past, not something consistent with what they've done in the past. Know what I mean? Come again.

So let's pretend they say, we weren't in position. We're calling it no goal, which is what they should have done. No one's not going. Oh, do you think they'd have overturned a no goal call? That's what I'm curious about. I think they would have. Because there isn't video evidence, but the puck also didn't grow a half centimeter either.

And you, like that image we're showing. Will they allow themselves that methods to prove it? I don't know. What's written in the rule book? Is it? They need clear evidence, but what are they allowing his evidence is my question? That's the thing. Yeah.

To me, I don't, that's not clear evidence. My interpretation would be the same. I think it's in. And I think the right call was made. But if they call it an all goal and you need clear evidence, I don't know that I see. It's not in using common sense, is it in? Yes.

But that's not what the rule book says. It's about conclusive. And because that blade is there, to me, that takes away. And so again, with pitchers in video, there's nothing conclusive. Yeah. Do they allow themselves to play the circle line straight? A game. And I wonder, because you know, they'll be talking about it today.

What's the directive to the, the refs moving forward? Is it continued to just call it a goal and we'll check or? It was a mistake. It can't be doing it. I don't know how they called it a goal. It's a mistake no matter what. It's a mistake because of how you operate.

Yeah. The system. Bad process, right outcome. And so Oilers fans can be really upset. But when you look at that freeze frame, it's like, well, it was in. But the refs process was wrong. Both those things are true. That's the only thing for the people involved, I think even Oilers fans, is that

I think pretty much everybody would say at the end, it's, it's barely in, but it's probably in. How much closer? Like, what if it was a little bit, it's close? More muddy. It's pretty, it's already. It's pretty close. If you cut that distance in half, now we're really, like, is it a centimeter? Like, is it touching?

The other thing that I've been thinking about a bunch is like, that line isn't on the ice. It's under ice painted on a. floor that's been flooded. And that's why it doesn't have sharp edges because you're looking through a little bit of ice and you're like, man, this is getting like when we're talking about millimeters, who that's why I wonder about the technology. It still has to exist somehow, some way. For sure.

We're not smart. But like with with tennis at the line is right on the. It's right there. Sensors under under. You could put the sensors in the, like there's, there's definitely ways of. Yeah. Another like conspiracy theory I saw if you, if there's an image of the full net. Like the posts are supposed to.

to be the same width as the goal line. Two inches diameter. Goal lines, two inches. They're not. They're overlapping the top and the bottom line. So it's just another rabbit hole for people to feel like they're getting screwed. But like was the puck in, everyone looking at that image thinks it is. Did the rest do the right thing?

No, they didn't. They weren't in the position to call it a goal and they did. The rational takes online is, or pissed off with how we, at least for moiler fans that I saw. This sucks that this, how this happened, things probably in. One step further is down three to one and maybe that's where you deserve to be. Yeah. Because you've blown leads. You scored first in all four games.

You said it last week and I've seen it brought up since that the main difference here is the oilers are playing a team that can score. The Kings didn't have the offensive firepower to come back against the oilers in the last three years. It's got to the ducks caught the ducks do. and the goal tending hasn't been good enough for them. That was their best goal tending in the series last night. Still one you want back. Four. And to the Oilers, it hasn't been,

they haven't been power play merchants. The power play with over six in the first two games. They've got three, I think, in the last two games. But still, five on five, they've been okay. They're scoring four goals a night for the most part. That should be enough to get you. Energy levels from the ducks is better. They have a high skill level and they're playing their asses off.

Yeah, and the power play for the Ducks has been the difference. We've talked so many series in the last four years with the Oilers power play. The Oilers penalty kill has killed less than half of the Ducks power plays. I don't know if it's because it's 45% at one point. I don't know if it's because coaches have watched how the Panthers played the Oilers. But all the T, L.A. who stands out because they had it and they totally tried to sit back. The Ducks aren't. The other thing LA did that the Ducks didn't do and haven't done,

Ellie shortened their bench like crazy. They basically went to three lines of 4D and they gasped their guys. We're seeing Tim Washy's fourth line out there with less than five minutes left out against McDavid's line for a D zone draw at home when you get to choose. Now that might be a little extreme, but it's clear that Quenville trusts them and they've done a really good job against the big guys, albeit both of them are less than a hundred. That is why Joel Quenville has always said.

He is a hell of a goat. Because he knows, he has talked to that fourth line and said, this is what I expect, go do it. And they're like, F, yeah, I'm doing it. Passed Al Arbor into second place all time in playoff victories. By the last night. He is now second to only Scotty Bowman, who continues to be the mark that they all chase.

But the, I think it's for the Oilers is, you've given up 17 goals in the last three games. Under no circumstances are you going to win, let alone in the playoffs. Worst goal tend to league heading into that game, obviously a little better there in terms of like you didn't allow five on a night where you should have allowed two or three, but still four. Still four. Yeah. Like if that's your best night of. And I don't care what anyone, like, I'm not making excuses for the others because they don't like them.

They got to be tired. I don't care what anyone says. Your mental makeup and your, we talked about human nature. there might be a little human nature. There's huge fatigue. Right? There's fatigue and some degree of injuries, right? Well, you think about dry saddle being absent for how long and that load that

it put on the rest of those guys. And now McDavid gets nicked up. He's skating at every TV time out. They're still using him on penalty kills. BX had talked about it. Like, if he's hurt and it's something that he doesn't need to keep loose, you're trying to peel back some minutes. He needs to go on the ice every opportunity you can, which tells me that you're shooting

them up or something's not good. he's worried about something getting stiff on him. It's all right. The Oilers' power penalty kill is 50%. They killed off the last Ducks power play last night to move up to 50% that is the worst in the playoffs. So now we touched it. Make you feel better?

Did your job well? I mean, no part of it makes me unhappy. I didn't even like a little. I can't watch it. I went to better. I made the mental calculation that, all right the others are up to

and I'm like well I don't need to sit here and watch this and be pissed off when they win or so jacked up or go you're going to pour myself for things of scotch and an old coach

texts me this morning hard to feel sorry for these guys