Around the NHL XIV: Game on...

[Caeldan]

Oh my...
Habs are so horrible and they still tie the game from 0-2 with 2 minutes to go. They literally had 2 chances during entire period...
Every. Single. Time.

To be fair the first goal they gave up was off a 2 on 1 created by an illegal check to the head that the refs missed.

 

[Ice-Tray]

Who cares about how 'human' the refs are. I'm not paying to see inaccuracies in the judgment of the play, I'm paying to see the players excel at a game within the rules. If we can come up with a fully automated and 100% accurate way to call the game I'd be all for it.

Also, I don't believe that the refs are allowed to use video replay currently to doublecheck a call. Maybe only check with another linesman or ref if they noticed something. Because otherwise that call would have been reversed, there's no reason for Glendenning to have been given a penalty for example and therefore the goal would have had no reason to be waved off and therefore counted.

The flow of the game would still be in place, because as it is now you see the refs occasionally chatting amongst each other for a period of time which would be significantly shorter if they could just skate over to a booth to doublecheck a replay. Or even better, have a third referee as an 'eye in the sky' who has the ability to make judgement calls for them when there's a question on the fly as it's another referee.

I care, obviously.

And yes, you are paying to see inaccuracies, so get used to it. You watch them when the players flub passes, goalies let in goals, coaches screw up matches, and when refs miss something. If you want a fully automated version, go buy a video game. Real life comes with pleasures and foibles, again, you're just going to have to deal with it. There's a reason that no professional league uses robots to ref, and I'll give you a hint, it isn't because they haven't come up with the genius plan.

In reality, reviewing all calls on the ice is a ridiculous idea that would clog up the game with pointless video replays. The refs wouldn't want to use it because they use their eyes. Do you not think the ref thought Holtby was tripped?? Why in the world would he stop the game to check a replay on a call he believes was good.... He wouldn't. What they do sometimes is converse quickly to see if a deflection was made before the puck exited, etc...

Maybe the players and coaches can complain, is that it? So you want the ref to be able to be pressured to doublecheck and potentially reverse calls based on whining players and coaches?

Maybe we could have a fan call-in line, you know, where we can all call in an demand reviews, cause we have the eye in the sky view.

Maybe we can just get rid of refs all together. We can have a few guys in an office in Toronto who watch the game and remotely blow whistles when penalties are committed.

In my opinion, complaining about the refs is part of a loser mentality, and a piss poor way for people to deal with the emotions drummed up during a sports game. Yes, we should overhaul the reffing system in major sports, and make every play reviewable because that goal should have counted. Like, I buy a ticket to a sporting event and because I invest a few dollars I deserve, nay, am owed, perfection!

The reffing is fine, mistakes are occasionally made, such is life, players make mistakes all the time, and so do coaches... Hey, let's second guess everything, lets debate each call before play resumes, or replace them all with robots! Personally I'd prefer to see you take your money elsewhere then watch the product you're suggesting. Thankfully I won't have to worry since it will never happen.

Jesus...

/Rant with all it's faults....

 

[HavlatMach9]

i think the refs do an unbelievable job, but i'd like to see an experiment with ref challenges to see if whether it works, disrupts the flow of the game, and/or gets abused somehow

 

[Nac Mac Feegle]

We're in a day and age where players are making up to $10 million per season, and teams can make $1 million in revenue from a single playoff game. One loss due to a bad call can cost millions.

The league really needs to do everything it can (reasonably, of course) to make sure the calls are right as much as possible.

If it means coaches get 1-2 coaching challenges per game, or the linesman have additional powers to make or wave off calls, or they expand video review, then so be it.

 

[Ice-Tray]

We're in a day and age where players are making up to $10 million per season, and teams can make $1 million in revenue from a single playoff game. One loss due to a bad call can cost millions.

The league really needs to do everything it can (reasonably, of course) to make sure the calls are right as much as possible.

If it means coaches get 1-2 coaching challenges per game, or the linesman have additional powers to make or wave off calls, or they expand video review, then so be it.

i think the refs do an unbelievable job, but i'd like to see an experiment with ref challenges to see if whether it works, disrupts the flow of the game, and/or gets abused somehow

It should be noted that the people making/losing the millions aren't clamouring for reffing changes. There are a lot of things on the agenda each year, but reffing doesn't seem to be one of them.

I don't mind the idea of a coaches challenge, but when would it be used? Offsides, icing races, goals?

In the NHL it's easy as they are set plays to review. In Hockey, the play in question could have happened minutes ago. Then what? Do we reset the clock to the time of the infraction if it's successful?

I'm curious as well, but don't really see any way that it would work unless it was to review a hit to determine that it wasn't actually to the head, and thus not a 5 and a game...

 

[Nac Mac Feegle]

It should be noted that the people making/losing the millions aren't clamouring for reffing changes. There are a lot of things on the agenda each year, but reffing doesn't seem to be one of them.

I don't mind the idea of a coaches challenge, but when would it be used? Offsides, icing races, goals?

In the NHL it's easy as they are set plays to review. In Hockey, the play in question could have happened minutes ago. Then what? Do we reset the clock to the time of the infraction if it's successful?

I'm curious as well, but don't really see any way that it would work unless it was to review a hit to determine that it wasn't actually to the head, and thus not a 5 and a game...

The biggest threat to a professional sports league is a perceived lack of credibility by the fans.

If the fans believe the refs are below any reasonable threshold, or the product itself is tainted by bias, your league is in trouble. That affects the gate, tv ratings, merchandise sales, media exposure and overall marketability.

For a coaches challenge, it would be like using a timeout...whenever the coach wants to use it. If it's only 1-2 allowed per game, it shouldn't matter what play is being called. You could even add a provision, if the ruling on the ice isn't overturned, it's a 2-minute delay of game penalty (like calling for a stick measurement) so coaches don't abuse it.

 

[starling]

Habs and Bruins are probably two most overrated teams this year.

 

[ChocolateLeclaire]

The NBA instituted official reviews on plays a while back and no one is complaining about the flow of the game. Come off it.

As others have pointed out, no one watches hockey for the "human element" of officiating. That's the argument people stupidly used to prevent the use of instant replay in baseball. It only took an umpire robbing a kid of a perfect game to finally make the "purists" realize how ridiculous this line of thinking is.

And the players and coaches aren't asking for it? Strange how it's ALWAYS a topic at the GM meetings recently.

 

[God Says No]

The NBA instituted official reviews on plays a while back and no one is complaining about the flow of the game. Come off it.

As others have pointed out, no one watches hockey for the "human element" of officiating. That's the argument people stupidly used to prevent the use of instant replay in baseball. It only took an umpire robbing a kid of a perfect game to finally make the "purists" realize how ridiculous this line of thinking is.

And the players and coaches aren't asking for it? Strange how it's ALWAYS a topic at the GM meetings recently.

True dat. The NFL was infuriating to watch before all the challenges and reviews were put in place. It's only matter of time before the NHL has some kind of review on top of goal reviews.

 

[Caeldan]

I care, obviously.

And yes, you are paying to see inaccuracies, so get used to it.
You watch them when the players flub passes, goalies let in goals, coaches screw up matches, and when refs miss something. If you want a fully automated version, go buy a video game. Real life comes with pleasures and foibles, again, you're just going to have to deal with it. There's a reason that no professional league uses robots to ref, and I'll give you a hint, it isn't because they haven't come up with the genius plan.

In reality, reviewing all calls on the ice is a ridiculous idea that would clog up the game with pointless video replays. The refs wouldn't want to use it because they use their eyes. Do you not think the ref thought Holtby was tripped?? Why in the world would he stop the game to check a replay on a call he believes was good.... He wouldn't. What they do sometimes is converse quickly to see if a deflection was made before the puck exited, etc...

Maybe the players and coaches can complain, is that it? So you want the ref to be able to be pressured to doublecheck and potentially reverse calls based on whining players and coaches?

Maybe we could have a fan call-in line, you know, where we can all call in an demand reviews, cause we have the eye in the sky view.


Maybe we can just get rid of refs all together. We can have a few guys in an office in Toronto who watch the game and remotely blow whistles when penalties are committed.

In my opinion, complaining about the refs is part of a loser mentality, and a piss poor way for people to deal with the emotions drummed up during a sports game. Yes, we should overhaul the reffing system in major sports, and make every play reviewable because that goal should have counted. Like, I buy a ticket to a sporting event and because I invest a few dollars I deserve, nay, am owed, perfection!

The reffing is fine, mistakes are occasionally made, such is life, players make mistakes all the time, and so do coaches... Hey, let's second guess everything, lets debate each call before play resumes, or replace them all with robots! Personally I'd prefer to see you take your money elsewhere then watch the product you're suggesting. Thankfully I won't have to worry since it will never happen.

Jesus...

/Rant with all it's faults....

I specified that I am not paying to see the officials fail at officiating. They're there to call the game, that's it. They are not the actual participants and their fallibility should be limited as much as possible when it comes to being able to influence the game.

Baseball I believe actually has gone to a more 'robotic' system for assisting the umpires with calling balls and strikes, as has tennis for the inbounds and out of bounds. Even soccer and their ball tracking system for determining whether a goal actually occurred. So yes, other sports are going to lengths to find ways to improve the accuracy of the calls especially when it comes to scoring plays.

And hey, if robots can call an accurate game - have at it.

Now you're just creating ridiculous arguments out of the air that have nothing to do with what I actually stated. And the game was already stopped because of a scoring play (which was negated) and a penalty call. I mean, Holtby was standing there for a minute or two just looking sheepishly at the replay in centre ice because he knew he caught a break since the refs don't currently have an avenue to correct their mistakes.

I think the ref saw Holtby fall, remembered seeing Glendenning skate in that area and guessed at the reason. Problem was, he wasn't the nearside ref and had a poor view of the situation.

The NBA instituted official reviews on plays a while back and no one is complaining about the flow of the game. Come off it.

As others have pointed out, no one watches hockey for the "human element" of officiating. That's the argument people stupidly used to prevent the use of instant replay in baseball. It only took an umpire robbing a kid of a perfect game to finally make the "purists" realize how ridiculous this line of thinking is.

And the players and coaches aren't asking for it? Strange how it's ALWAYS a topic at the GM meetings recently.

And the thing is, instant replay in baseball actually made a difference in a game 7 of the world series.

Imagine if that Holtby fall had happened in Game 7 of the SCF where a team like Toronto was on the receiving end of a poor call that everyone in the building and watching at home around the world (including the refs) can see that they're wrong 2s later on the replay.

But not having the ability to actually correct their mistake because you know... tradition! How silly would that be? How much of a joke would it turn the league into.

Again, I'm not saying to stop and review every call. I'm saying that in those situations where you see refs huddling over in a corner trying to recall what they saw and didn't see, allow them access to video replay and/or an actual third ref who is in a video booth to assist with getting the call right. And since there's already a pause when the puck goes in the net - there's nothing wrong with having a quick look to make sure the call was right.

And I do think that there should be taken into account play directly leading up to the scoring opportunity (ie last night's first goal in Vancouver where Burrows hits Emelin late with a shoulder to the head, creates a 2 on 1 -- that's probably the grey area where I'm not sure exactly when to draw the line), so for example if you wave off a goal because of a phantom penalty... or someone scores because they were a mile offside entering the zone before taking a shot... yeah that element should be reviewable.

Now if for example they miss an offsides, the team enters the zone and sets up a cycle before finally scoring - that's too far back because now the other side has had a chance to recover from a blown call.

The only reason it really hasn't happened in hockey yet is because that grey area of where to draw the line is hard to define in a rulebook with the way the game flows. But at the very least you could start it with a review on scoring plays being allowed - and either add a time element and/or a touches rule to figure out how far back you can go to review (eg any event that occurs between the goal being scored and the previous two players to touch the puck, or 5s, whichever is sooner).

 

[aragorn]

I think it is inevitable that coaching challenges will eventually come to play in the NHL. Video review is now in almost every sport & it's just a matter of time where coaches will be given a coaching challenge in a certain circumstance. Maybe like football if they lose their challenge they lose their time outs. There is something else that was never in hockey before & now it is like "Time outs", so I expect the coaches challenge to be the next new thing in hockey at some point in future. While there is the question of the length of games it seems today that there is so much coverage of games from all angles that I'm not sure people watching care if games are extended slightly they are probably going to watch & listen to post game coverage anyways.

After all, some games are decided by one play & if it isn't called correctly it could cost a team a playoff birth or better seeding & playoffs are worth millions to owners these days. There is a lot at stake & the onus is on the NHL to get it right, a coaches challenge helps to get it right. Of course, a coaches challenge in a REDBLACKS game I attended on a reviewed play which I have never seen called before was not over turned & then we read in the paper days later that the league was wrong & the call on the field on that fumble should have been the correct call. Nothing is fool proof it seems especially when humans & sometimes egos are involved.

 

[Deku]

 

[Knave]

That's pretty cool.

 

[Do Make Say Think]

The NBA instituted official reviews on plays a while back and no one is complaining about the flow of the game. Come off it.

As others have pointed out, no one watches hockey for the "human element" of officiating. That's the argument people stupidly used to prevent the use of instant replay in baseball. It only took an umpire robbing a kid of a perfect game to finally make the "purists" realize how ridiculous this line of thinking is.

And the players and coaches aren't asking for it? Strange how it's ALWAYS a topic at the GM meetings recently.

I think the most reasonnable argument against reviews of referee calls is that they don't want to legthen games

Games keep taking longer and longer to complete. It's a real issue.

Then there's the whole issue of getting all the people who have a say on the matter to agree on what is, and what isn't reviewable and everything surrounding it

I think it's a lot more complicated that people think (not necessarily you though!)

 

[Super Cake]

[NHL]658700&catid=49[/NHL]

 

[Karlsson2Turris*]

Man Nyquist is amazing

 

[Super Cake]

So what do you think? Dirty hit or clean hit?

 

[God Says No]

clean

 

[bacon25]

So what do you think? Dirty hit or clean hit?

Clean, from the video it seems like Yandle just pushes him away.

 

[Six Assets]

Don't like the play

 

[bacon25]

On another note from that gif, why are players helmets coming off so easily?

Watching the Flames/ Preds game, Neal is carrying the offense for that team.

 

[Langdon Alger]

I've been watching a few Red Wings games lately, and they are fun to watch, but man I cannot stand their announcers. These guys are the biggest homers around. The colour guy is especially bad.

 

[Langdon Alger]

Habs and Bruins are probably two most overrated teams this year.

Bruins maybe, Habs no. I think they are for real as much as it pains me to say it.

 

[Six Assets]

healthy bruins team + sequin would be scary

 

[Do Make Say Think]

Bruins maybe, Habs no. I think they are for real as much as it pains me to say it.

It's all Price though

However, if your team is going to be all about one player, the goalie is the best one to go for