Calling Back Goals Based on Missed Offsides...

[wintersej]

I hate this rule when it is called against my team and love this rule when it is called against the other teams.

I hate losing a goal more than loving having a goal taken off the board for another team. You know the team deserved the goal and your team still screwed up.

 

[Blackjack]

You’re still arguing for taking away goals that happen because of plays that happened before a stoppage. Let’s say in your scenario, there is a missed offside and Carolina takes a shot and it’s stopped by Gus. Then they go to commercial break. Then on the offensive zone faceoff after that commercial break, they score off the ensuing faceoff. You’re saying that it should all be taken back because of that missed offside call.

Yes, of course this goal should be disallowed. It would not have been scored if the offside call wasn’t missed. How can you possible dispute that? Scoring goals off of faceoffs is a very common thing to the point where teams have faceoff specialists for the defensive zone just for this purpose.

There is no serious argument for not expanding the rule to include these offensive zone faceoff goals at the very least.

But why stop there? What if multiple stoppages happen between a goal and the missed offside? What if the missed offside happened in the 1st and then the first goal is scored in the 3rd? Who’s to say a team didn’t get an advantage because of that offside call in the 1st?

I think you can make a much more convincing argument that once the puck leaves the zone any advantage is sufficiently diminished. But not when the faceoff stays in the zone after a missed offside. That is a serious advantage.

Penalties are often called after the play is blown dead, so that argument doesn’t hold much water. Hell, penalties can be called off clearly offside plays. If a player is offside, and the whistle is blown, but he still shoots it towards the net, that’s a penalty that’s called. And if not that one, then the ensuing scrum from shooting that puck will certainly cause a few penalties to be called.

I’m not talking about penalties that happen after a play, I’m talking about penalties that happen when a player is trying to defend an attack that should not have happened in the first place. If the ref blows a play offside and a player trips the puck carrier a moment later, that is not a penalty. Why should it count if the offside was missed? What sense does that make?

Stop trying to defend an absurd rule and you won’t have to keep twisting yourself into knots.

 

[Tawnos]

So why replace a rule you find arbitrary by a completely different arbitrary one. That's a lateral move.

I'm not talking about replacing any rules. I'm talking about tweaking the existing rules to improve outcomes and make them fall more in line with what the rule is there for in the first place.

 

[Dazed and Confused]

For how much emphasis the NHL puts on this, the fact they still often lack good camera angles in a lot of arena is annoying af. Seriously how hard is it to puck a camera on the roof at both bluelines? Unobstructed overhead views, where there's no angles you're trying to look past.

But also, the fact that this became such a point of emphasis shows the NHL lost the plot on this.
It was designed to prevent the clear-as-day offsides, not the "well he was a mouse's dick over the line, so it's coming back."


Set it up so there's a 1 minute review limit, where they can pause, but not zoom in on the replays. If it's not clear after that, then it's a good goal.

 

[Golden_Jet]

For how much emphasis the NHL puts on this, the fact they still often lack good camera angles in a lot of arena is annoying af. Seriously how hard is it to puck a camera on the roof at both bluelines? Unobstructed overhead views, where there's no angles you're trying to look past.

They have that, just the NHL doesn’t make them always available to the broadcasters.

Sometimes they do, and we’ve seen it, but also sometimes times the overhead is blocked out, like the ones in the boards are sometimes.

 

[Spurgeon]

And do you think that this will stop the "but my team scored, it is not fair to take the goal back" whinning?

Also, a much simpler solution is to have a fifth ref in the review booth to call back all "clear" offsides. Why should be up to coaches/assistant coaches to fix refs mistakes? Of course, that would just increase the whinning around here.

I think it will significantly reduce it because it’s called in live-time, which means the error is likely to be much more egregious. Teams aren’t going to want to risk a penalty on a 50/50 call.

One benefit of going to something like this too is you’d be able to put an indicator on the broadcast that the possession has a pending review if a goal is scored. At least as a fan, that’d allow you to temper expectations if a goal is scored.

 

[Nocashstyle]

It seems like there are such obvious “middle ground” fixes for these reviews:

The replays are in real time and/or there is a timer for the review, and if nothing is decided by the end of time, it’s clearly not conclusive so the call on the ice stands.