Earlier during what is likely to be his third Vezina Trophy-winning season, Connor Hellebuyck pretty much gave up trying to figure out exactly what constitutes goaltender interference. Winnipeg’s star goaltender has served on competition committees. He has given spiels and offered clips as exhibits to explain what should or should not be called.

Still, he has remained baffled by what is and what isn’t interference — and he is not alone.

“I’ve really tried my best to help over the last four or five years,” Hellebuyck said after a goaltender interference challenge went against him and the Jets in a fall win. “I’ve tried to help. I’ve tried to make it more black and white.”

Just because your favorite NHL goaltender gets bumped, nudged, pushed, crashed into, goes down with injury or even loses their helmet when a goal is scored doesn’t mean it necessarily will be goaltender interference.

Or sometimes it will be and not count after video review, like the New York Islanders having a potential game-winning goal against Columbus disallowed Monday night, much to coach and Hall of Fame goalie Patrick Roy’s dismay.

“I know what I think it is,” Colorado goaltender Mackenzie Blackwood said of interference. “But I don’t know that’s what it actually is.”

Director of officiating Stephen Walkom and other executives have told teams to be sure they have video evidence to overturn a call on the ice before making a coach’s challenge.

Losing a challenge is a minor penalty.

“These aren’t black and white,” VP of hockey operations Kris King said. “There’s a lot of judgment, not only from the guy calling it in real time but also from us, as well, when we’re looking at these plays.”

It is spelled out under section 69.1 in the NHL rulebook: “Goals should be disallowed only if: (1) an attacking player, either by his positioning or by contact, impairs the goalkeeper’s ability to move freely within his crease or defend his goal; or (2) an attacking player initiates intentional or deliberate contact with a goalkeeper, inside or outside of his goal crease.”

Then there is this clause: “Incidental contact with a goalkeeper will be permitted, and resulting goals allowed, when such contact is initiated outside of the goal crease, provided the attacking player has made a reasonable effort to avoid such contact.”

Avalanche coach Jared Bednar was incensed earlier this season over a collision in a game against Buffalo. Colorado goaltender Scott Wedgewood was hurt and down on the ice after Sabres forward Zach Benson crashed into Avalanche center Parker Kelly and fell into Wedgewood’s right leg.

Benson got up, gained possession of the puck and scored with Wedgewood still down and inside the goal.

Bednar didn’t like the lag time with his goalie down and challenged for goaltender interference. It was purely out of spite.

“It gives them another chance to do the right thing,” Bednar said. “The goal shouldn’t have counted, and so, yeah, I was mad. So we just did it.”

Bednar talked to the league the next day. They understood the other’s point of view, even if they did still disagree.

“There’s lots of things that we look for,” Bednar said. “Does he go in on his own, does he get pushed in? Does the goalie have time to get reset? You’ve always got to look at the blue paint, too. There’s a bunch of things.”

The league’s criteria involves whether contact was intentional or incidental, occurred in or out of the crease, if the defending player caused it and whether the goaltender had a chance to reset.