Нижний Новгород (17:00)
In the 9th minute of the September 5 game in Nizhny Novgorod, after a shot by the guests directed to the home team’s net, the video goal judge referred to the video review to ascertain whether the puck fully crossed the line. The video showed that the puck fully crossed the goal line, and so the referee awarded a goal.
In the 1st minute of the game in Kazan, after an apparent goal scored by the guests, the home team’s head coach requested a video review of the goal, claiming a possible goalie interference. The video review showed that Vityaz’s forward initiated contact with the goalie before the puck crossed the line, and as a result, the goal was struck out.
In the 6th minute, the visiting team scored an apparent goal which triggered a request from the home team bench for a video review. The appeal was made on the grounds of possible goalie interference. The video review showed no contact between the guest forward and the home goalie, and so the referee awarded a goal.
In the 20th minute of the game in Moscow, after an apparent goal scored by the guests, the referee called for the video goal judge to review the situation to ascertain whether the guest scored the goal with his foot. The video review showed that the Admiral player intentionally initiated foot contact with the puck, and as a result, the goal was struck out.