I feel like the league should have intervened. Sort of like in a poker tournament on the bubble and you play hand for hand. The refs stop the game and face off at center ice formally informing the Flyers they are eliminated and put their goalie back in.
You think the league should have
ordered them to put their goalie back in??? OK, I don't want to go ad hominem, but that might be the most absurd thing I've ever read on this forum.
You said that had Torts known the Flyers were eliminated, and he still pulled his goalie, that would be unethical. Wouldn't it be precisely the opposite? If he knew his team was eliminated and then changed his strategy based on the fact that they were out, just to affect the playoff chances of other teams,
that would be unethical.
Torts had to assume that the Red Wings would lose in regulation, because that had to happen for the Flyers to make the playoffs, and it was something he could not influence. He would not have been watching that score because there was no reason to, it would be a needless distraction.
But even if he learned that the Flyers had been knocked out seconds before pulling the goalie, and still pulled the goalie, that would be a) the most ethical course and b) the best course of action for his team because i) maybe the report about the Red Wings making OT was wrong -- maybe it was Caps misinformation for example and ii) maybe the Red Wings equalizing goal would be overturned by Toronto. Maybe the Red Wings would forfeit the game because of something the league would find out after the game. Again, Torts would have to assume/hope that this would happen, because it would have to happen for them to make it in.