Calling Back Goals Based on Missed Offsides...

[FinlandPanther]

I want to say I find that hard to believe....but I haven't seen it at all. Just hard to believe it was onside and not even close yet called offside? Something doesn't add up.....have video?

I won't dispute it too much though as I remember watching a playoff game years ago...think it was PIT and PHI and thinking.....PHI was "way offside" "not close".....and replays confirmed that (before video review). I will say, I've said before "that looked way offside" at full speed and then the reply actually shows onside.

I think blowing something offside when it isn't even close is even more of a rarity though.

It was the last game we played against Pittsburgh. Evan Rodrigues was clearly onside and they blew it. He had a good foot and a half of space. They showed multiple angles and at a slow speed. He was clearly offside. I don’t know how I can go about finding it again as I dont have the game saved.

 

[Toby91ca]

It's a matter of where the failure was that resulted in a goal. On the initial entry, if it were offside, the failure is on the part of the linesman. But at a certain point, it's more of a failure of the defending team to regain possession and clear.

Yeah, but the offside contributes to the defending team's failure.....the longer the offensive team has possession, the harder it is for the defending team to get it out....they'll get more and more tired. It is absolutely frustrating to be watching a game and see a goal scored and then something happens and you are wondering what's going on and find out it's a challenge for offside.....no one remembers there was a close play 2 min ago, etc.

simple. after the initial rush, the offside isnt a factor in the goal anymore. after the initial rush, the defending team has a fair chance to actually play defense and regain the puck, a goal scored is a failure on them

Yes, I pointed that out as the logic, I just don't tend to agree with it fully....possession is a big advantage and if you were offside, you are getting an unfair advantage of gaining that possession in the offensive end.

 

[Tawnos]

What was the refs' reasoning for that one again?

I don't have the replay handy but did the refs just flat out miss it completely, or did they say it deflected off a Preds player, negating the offside in the first place?

My memory was that they just missed it completely.

 

[SEALBound]

Yeah, but the offside contributes to the defending team's failure.....the longer the offensive team has possession, the harder it is for the defending team to get it out....they'll get more and more tired. It is absolutely frustrating to be watching a game and see a goal scored and then something happens and you are wondering what's going on and find out it's a challenge for offside.....no one remembers there was a close play 2 min ago, etc.


Yes, I pointed that out as the logic, I just don't tend to agree with it fully....possession is a big advantage and if you were offside, you are getting an unfair advantage of gaining that possession in the offensive end.

The 2 minutes of play are irrelevant though. It's like if the bank makes an error in your favor and accidently deposits $1mil into your account. It doesn't matter if you went out and spent $500k already...you owe the bank the money. The activity after the mistake but before being called makes no difference. At the same time, it's also up to the coach to initiate the challenge. So there are indeed times when a player is offsides but a coach will elect not to challenge for fear of a penalty.

 

[AvroArrow]

Call me crazy but i'm in favor of getting calls right.

Why should teams be allowed to go offside and score a goal ? I think it's really dumb for someone to argue that players should be allowed to go offside leading to a goal. If you have a problem with it, you should hold the player accountable who doesn't follow the rules of the game.

 

[Derailed75]

The 2 minutes of play are irrelevant though. It's like if the bank makes an error in your favor and accidently deposits $1mil into your account. It doesn't matter if you went out and spent $500k already...you owe the bank the money. The activity after the mistake but before being called makes no difference. At the same time, it's also up to the coach to initiate the challenge. So there are indeed times when a player is offsides but a coach will elect not to challenge for fear of a penalty.

I hate when the play drags out forever before a goal and you find out it was offsides. I think offsides and calling back goals should stay, as many have said it's a black-and-white rule with no grey area and no judgment call. I would like to see a way for the league to catch the offsides and blow the play dead instead of waiting for a goal after a prolonged possession.

 

[Sheppy]

Call me crazy but i'm in favor of getting calls right.

Why should teams be allowed to go offside and score a goal ? I think it's really dumb for someone to argue that players should be allowed to go offside leading to a goal. If you have a problem with it, you should hold the player accountable who doesn't follow the rules of the game.

I'll go back to what I said earlier in regards to getting the calls "right"

If a player enters the zone illegally, and the defending team takes a penalty, should the defending teams coach be able to challenge the illegal zone entry? I mean, i think it's dumb, but if he was deemed "offside" that penalty should be negated too?

I'm a fan of human error, if that makes sense, unless it's completely insane where a guy is offside by like 3-4 feet, which never really happens anymore.

Basketball half the players travel resulting in baskets. Baseball umps miss strikes and balls here and there.

If a linesman misses an "offside" because a skaters blade is a sesame seed offside, so be it.

I'm just not a fan of getting excited for your team to score and never be confident it's counting until the puck is dropped. Half the goals they zoom in on the opposing teams coach nuts deep into an ipad and they delay, and delay until there's a puck drop.

If they're going to review it, review it at real time speed and give it 30-40 seconds. There's literally zero reason to slow it down to 100 frames per second. If you can't see it at real time, take the L and f*** off.

 

[SEALBound]

I hate when the play drags out forever before a goal and you find out it was offsides. I think offsides and calling back goals should stay, as many have said it's a black-and-white rule with no grey area and no judgment call. I would like to see a way for the league to catch the offsides and blow the play dead instead of waiting for a goal after a prolonged possession.

I would agree with that, overall, but I have two comments:

1. The coaches have to initiate the challenge. That's quite a burden on the league to check that many potential offsides in a game in real-time. I would venture a guess that by the time they decide and communicate it, the play is probably already dead.

2. I've established how relatively rare these challenges are in the grand scheme and I would suggest that challenges that arise after prolonged possession (maybe, what more than 1 or 2 minutes?) are even rarer.

 

[Derailed75]

I would agree with that, overall, but I have two comments:

1. The coaches have to initiate the challenge. That's quite a burden on the league to check that many potential offsides in a game in real-time. I would venture a guess that by the time they decide and communicate it, the play is probably already dead.

Possibly they can determine a goal is missed and blow a play dead pretty quickly, I do like the coaches having to risk something and have a short amount of time to do it though so I wouldn't personally like to see a change.

2. I've established how relatively rare these challenges are in the grand scheme and I would suggest that challenges that arise after prolonged possession (maybe, what more than 1 or 2 minutes?) are even rarer.

Agreed

 

[Dr Pepper]

Call me crazy but i'm in favor of getting calls right.

Why should teams be allowed to go offside and score a goal ? I think it's really dumb for someone to argue that players should be allowed to go offside leading to a goal. If you have a problem with it, you should hold the player accountable who doesn't follow the rules of the game.

It's not about "allowing" it, I just think the league would be better off implementing a system that doesn't involve taking ten minutes and five different camera angles zoomed in to see a fraction of an inch of white ice between a skate blade and blue paint on a zone entry that occurred anywhere from thirty to sixty seconds before the goal was scored.

 

[Seedtype]

Could technology be used to just manage offsides? I'm thinking of how tennis has that system to quickly review whether the ball was out or not. (Icing calls can also be ran by such a system)

Basically my thinking is to remove any human subjectivity in such a clear yes/no situation. You could eliminate reviews completely and it would be reliable 99.99 percent of the time. Also, linemen can focus on looking out for penalties.

(I would never advocate for computers to manage reffing in general, because computer perfection in penalty calls would kill the game/inhumane, heh)

 

[tarheelhockey]

Offside isn't and has never been a subjective call.

“Never has been” is not accurate. The original concept of offside was comparable to that in rugby or soccer, which in that era was rather subjective by nature (it was not specified precisely what it meant for a player to “precede” the puck, and realistically the single referee on the ice would rarely have been in a position to make any sort of precision judgment, so it came down to the ref’s opinion on whether a player had rushed too far ahead). The blue lines were originally added not for their current purpose, but to demarcate zones where players could make forward passes (in other words, where they could be legally offside) and the rules around those zones changed with time. The idea of a “linesman” as compared to a referee came into existence when the current offside concept was adopted, setting the blue lines as a single boundary in each zone where the offside judgment would be made.

Even at that, there were still subjective elements to offside calls. The review in Saturday’s CAR/MIN game was a good example, where a player was called offside (not in live play but on review) for still having a foot on the ice while entering the bench door during the 2nd period where the door is on the wrong side of the blue line. Linesmen would rarely-to-never have made that call prior to review, not because they didn’t see it but because it’s a trivial application of the rule.

The core spirit of the offside rule is that hockey offense should take the form of coherent rushes, not two teams slinging the puck back and forth to cherry-pickers. The modern application gives some latitude to vertical passing and cherry-picking, but draws the line (literally) at the final 1/3rd of the ice where players are forced to realign themselves on-side with the puck. Only during the era of video review has this been viewed as something which needs to be measured down to the millimeter, which isn’t even perceivable by the human eye in real-time and which linesman didn’t even attempt to achieve as they were watching for meaningful violations at multiple points along the line simultaneously. This idea of taking out a microscope and looking for a sliver of daylight between skate and paint is a shift in the logic and application of the rule within the past 10 years.

 

[AvroArrow]

I'll go back to what I said earlier in regards to getting the calls "right"

If a player enters the zone illegally, and the defending team takes a penalty, should the defending teams coach be able to challenge the illegal zone entry? I mean, i think it's dumb, but if he was deemed "offside" that penalty should be negated too?

I'm a fan of human error, if that makes sense, unless it's completely insane where a guy is offside by like 3-4 feet, which never really happens anymore.

Basketball half the players travel resulting in baskets. Baseball umps miss strikes and balls here and there.

If a linesman misses an "offside" because a skaters blade is a sesame seed offside, so be it.

I'm just not a fan of getting excited for your team to score and never be confident it's counting until the puck is dropped. Half the goals they zoom in on the opposing teams coach nuts deep into an ipad and they delay, and delay until there's a puck drop.

If they're going to review it, review it at real time speed and give it 30-40 seconds. There's literally zero reason to slow it down to 100 frames per second. If you can't see it at real time, take the L and f*** off.

Another option is like what the NFL does, where every TD is reviewed but that would be unnecessary in hockey imo.

You make a fair point here, I don't have an answer in the moment to how I'd address that. But being able to score because of a bad missed call doesn't sit right with me. Maybe I'm biased, but the goal that eliminated the Leafs from the playoffs in 2022 and 2023 was directly off a missed penalty which led to the scoring chance/gwg against.

It wasn't an offside but 2 blatant missed holding calls led to those goals, I wish we could have reviewed and challenged it.

I think it's ridiculous that a teams season can be ended because of a missed call which is so easily reviewable with todays technology.

 

[Golden_Jet]

I'll go back to what I said earlier in regards to getting the calls "right"

If a player enters the zone illegally, and the defending team takes a penalty, should the defending teams coach be able to challenge the illegal zone entry? I mean, i think it's dumb, but if he was deemed "offside" that penalty should be negated too?

No, there was no goal scored.

 

[Sheppy]

No, there was no goal scored.

So if they scored on the powerplay, that offside that shouldn't have happened help result in a goal, no?

I'm just saying, it's silly, I know, but it effected the game.

 

[ijuka]

I would like there to be some threshold. Like, if the refs missed it during play, then in order for it to get called back, the offside needs to be significant, like 1 foot.

I don't vibe at all with half an inch deciding between a goal or not. These rules aren't designed to be analyzed with a microscope. If it's close enough to be a judgment call by the ref, let them make the judgment call.

 

[Golden_Jet]

I would like there to be some threshold. Like, if the refs missed it during play, then in order for it to get called back, the offside needs to be significant, like 1 foot.

I don't vibe at all with half an inch deciding between a goal or not. These rules aren't designed to be analyzed with a microscope. If it's close enough to be a judgment call by the ref, let them make the judgment call.

How do you propose this 1 foot threshold would be measured to determine if reviewable.

 

[tarheelhockey]

Except that by and large, the call is easy to make. Again, the number of challenges vs the number of occurrences is minuscule in the grand scheme.

You are wrong on the "an inch here or there simply doesn't matter". It does matter. From the most basic fundamental structure of the game aspect, it matters. An inch, okay. What about two? Three? Four? A foot? When EXACTLY does it matter? Literally, name the distance. How far can a player violate a rule before it should be called? How much is too much? So you call the 6 inches offsides. Then you let the 1ft one go and a goal is scored. Is that fair to either team to have an undefined rule when looking for the utmost consistency and quality of the game at the professional level?

I go back to the goal line question. The rule states the puck must completely cross the goal line. Game 7 OT SCF - Oilers vs Canes rematch. McDavid puts the puck past the Canes goalie and it goes over the line 90% of the way. The refs say, "Well, geez, it's close, plus the fans might get mad if we review it because this is an intense game. Good goal, Oilers win". You're going to sit here and tell that is good for the league, that the inch doesn't matter, and that you have no issue with that? Please.

I mean, if you’ve lived in a world without video review then you’ve already experienced all of this and learned to grow as a person and not have a mental meltdown about it. It’s sports, not a lab experiment. Human error is a factor and always will be.

Adding replay hasn’t solved any of this. Show me a team that’s lost a game 7 by one goal and doesn’t have some theory about how the refs screwed them. You can’t, it doesn’t exist. People continuously find fault, no matter how precise you make the calls. You’re fighting a losing battle against human nature.

The spirit of the rule is irrelevant. You know this. It matters just as much in baseball, basketball, and football as it does hockey. If a basketball player shoots with his foot inside the 3pt line, should it count as 2 or 3? "Well, he was close to the line...he's meeting the spirit, give him 3." If that was the viewpoint of the refs and NBA, the NBA would be the biggest joke on the planet. It would lose legitimacy as a "professional" league. If we're talking high school hockey, you'd have a point. Professional league? It's bonkers to suggest referees should be that lose with the defined rules.

Again — watch a high school basketball game, you’ll see players toe the line and get away with it. Guess how many people even notice, let alone flip out and think the game isn’t “legitimate”? None of them. At worst, one guy yells at the ref and the game moves on. It’s not an issue unless you make it one by trying to solve the nonexistent problem.

If the waived icing results in a goal that shouldn't have been, it should be reviewable.

So you’re going to review subjective calls now? Where does it end?

Reject all you want but that doesn't make you right. The league itself doesn't support that viewpoint either. The refs (and league) have the responsibility to ensure the parameters of the game are fair and enforced. Period. This "spirit of the rule" stuff is a bad argument. Again, see the goalline scenario above. This forum regularly has threads about how the rulebook is enforced. Extremely common occurrence especially around the playoffs as well. By and large, people want the rulebook enforced. It should be.

Then it’s weird that there is almost always an active thread with pages and pages of fans saying they hate offside review. Weird that there are hundreds of articles and opinion columns covering the negative reaction to it. Weird that it’s commonplace to hear it called the worst rule in sports.

I mean gee whiz, it’s not like the NHL itself doesn’t have a history of having to eliminate a review rule because everyone hated it and it precipitated one of the most embarrassing moments in the history of the sport. It’s not like that scenario didn’t end with the NHL saying they’d prefer a subjective standard to an objective one.

This isn’t even the first time we’ve gone through this specific scenario with this specific league.

 

[Sheppy]

I mean, if you’ve lived in a world without video review then you’ve already experienced all of this and learned to grow as a person and not have a mental meltdown about it. It’s sports, not a lab experiment. Human error is a factor and always will be.

Adding replay hasn’t solved any of this. Show me a team that’s lost a game 7 by one goal and doesn’t have some theory about how the refs screwed them. You can’t, it doesn’t exist. People continuously find fault, no matter how precise you make the calls. You’re fighting a losing battle against human nature.




Again — watch a high school basketball game, you’ll see players toe the line and get away with it. Guess how many people even notice, let alone flip out and think the game isn’t “legitimate”? None of them. At worst, one guy yells at the ref and the game moves on. It’s not an issue unless you make it one by trying to solve the nonexistent problem.



So you’re going to review subjective calls now? Where does it end?



Then it’s weird that there is almost always an active thread with pages and pages of fans saying they hate offside review. Weird that there are hundreds of articles and opinion columns covering the negative reaction to it. Weird that it’s commonplace to hear it called the worst rule in sports.

I mean gee whiz, it’s not like the NHL itself doesn’t have a history of having to eliminate a review rule because everyone hated it and it precipitated one of the most embarrassing moments in the history of the sport. It’s not like that scenario didn’t end with the NHL saying they’d prefer a subjective standard to an objective one.

This isn’t even the first time we’ve gone through this specific scenario with this specific league.

I wish i could like this 100 times.

 

[Golden_Jet]

If the waived icing results in a goal that shouldn't have been, it should be reviewable.

No it shouldn’t, 100% against that, even for red line icings.
Lots of icings are a race for the puck, and it’s a judgement call on who would have won the race.

 

[Ghost of Murph]

I'm all for getting calls correct, but I'm also for continuity in the game. Offside reviews need to have a time limit. If it's so close that it takes 4 or 5 mins of reviewing and slowing the game down then something needs to change. I would put a time limit on offside reviews.

I would also make a rule that says if the team entered the zone 10 seconds or more before a goal then offside can't be challenged at all. A slight offside should not hinder the defense after 10 secs of entering the zone.

It is not good for the game to have a team dominate in the ozone for a long stretch, score a goal, celebrate, then have a 3 minute review take away the goal because a player was an inch offside. Balance is what's needed.

 

[Sheppy]

I still picture a scenario where we are in OT in a game 7 of the cup finals.

Team scores (so they think)
Gloves, sticks, everything all over the place. Media rushing to the ice, players losing their mind thinking it's over. Shit everywhere.

*Nerd on bench staring at ipad*

Tweet. The play is under review.

The player entering the zone was "offside" by the width of sewing needle.

RESUME PLAY.

 

[SEALBound]

I mean, if you’ve lived in a world without video review then you’ve already experienced all of this and learned to grow as a person and not have a mental meltdown about it. It’s sports, not a lab experiment. Human error is a factor and always will be.

Adding replay hasn’t solved any of this. Show me a team that’s lost a game 7 by one goal and doesn’t have some theory about how the refs screwed them. You can’t, it doesn’t exist. People continuously find fault, no matter how precise you make the calls. You’re fighting a losing battle against human nature.

You're avoiding the question.

Again — watch a high school basketball game, you’ll see players toe the line and get away with it. Guess how many people even notice, let alone flip out and think the game isn’t “legitimate”? None of them. At worst, one guy yells at the ref and the game moves on. It’s not an issue unless you make it one by trying to solve the nonexistent problem.

High school game, that's fine. Professional league with the means to get it right, not fine. Not hard.

So you’re going to review subjective calls now? Where does it end?

Easy - offsides, goalie interference, questionable goal (did the puck cross the line?), puck over the glass, high stickings. These are hardly controversial happenings in a game that should have some level of ability to ensure correct call.

Then it’s weird that there is almost always an active thread with pages and pages of fans saying they hate offside review. Weird that there are hundreds of articles and opinion columns covering the negative reaction to it. Weird that it’s commonplace to hear it called the worst rule in sports.

Vocal minority do not speak for the majority. The majority likely don't care or don't see it as the downfall of the league. 99.99% of the threads here get started here by a fan of a team that gets a goal called back. I wouldn't suggest using "sour grapes threads" as evidence of wide spread consensus among fans.

 

[Rebels57]

There needs to be a time limit between the zone entry and the goal for offsides challenge to eligible. I have seen goals come back this season that took place 30 seconds after a zone entry that was offsides by a whisker. It's a joke. I would put the time limit at 10 seconds. That should easily cover any goal scored off the rush where offsides is an actual factor. Hell even 5 seconds would cover that.

 

[Sheppy]

Again, if there is a review, review it at real time. Hockey isn't played at 100 frames per second.