Get rid of offsides review.

[Pi]

Another classic. If we're getting rid of the review, just get rid of offside calls entirely.

Yeah that's the only acceptable thing to do. It's either offside or it isn't so the review isn't bad at all. You want to get rid of the blue line altogether? I am fine with that.

 

[Rodgerwilco]

I mean.....if they "100% got it right" then the play would've been blown dead before Mack even scored.

These "ackshually, your zone entry was sorta offsides, way before that goal was scored" video reviews are pretty lame, even IF they're done by the letter of the law.

The commenter was saying they made the right call in this case with 100% surety after review, not that they get the correct call 100% of the time in real-time.

As with many who oppose the reviews, it seems like your problem is with offside even being a rule in the sport, otherwise you wouldn't have a problem with them being correctly called. There is no such thing as "sorta offside"... either a play is or is not offside. It's one of the few black and white rules in the game.

 

[SEALBound]

I just find it odd that the NHL enforces offside by the book but icing is this nebulous subjective thing and if you dump the puck in just behind the red line its "close enough."

It's because of the way the rule it written. Offsides is very clear and there are exact ways to measure. Icing gets a little more iffy when it's the "who will get there first" decision at the hash marks. Now, if the rule said, if the other teams player crosses the hashmarks first, icing. Other team, no icing. Then you could make the reviews possible.

Only times it's more doable is in instances where the puck doesn't cross the goal line and they call it prior. I saw that a couple of times but in all of those cases, the puck was dropped at center ice.

One possible change could be, if it's a race where it's a "tie", then drop the puck just outside the far blue line. Those clear icings where there's no race, dzone.

 

[Rebels57]

I hate it. It's ridiculous and i'm not an Avs fan. Colorado had goals called back 22 seconds and 13 seconds after the entries. Challenges should be restricted to plays in a which a goal occurs within 5 seconds of the entry. That would eliminate the egregious offsides that actually play a big factor in the goal, like on breakaways and odd-man rushes.

 

[Phion Keneuf]

Goals should only count if someone was offside

 

[ottawa]

You would hate soccer and it's VAR

 

[Rebels57]

The commenter was saying they made the right call in this case with 100% surety after review, not that they get the correct call 100% of the time in real-time.

As with many who oppose the reviews, it seems like your problem is with offside even being a rule in the sport, otherwise you wouldn't have a problem with them being correctly called. There is no such thing as "sorta offside"... either a play is or is not offside. It's one of the few black and white rules in the game.

Aside from the fact that loads of goals are being called back on offsides plays that have no factor on the actual play, it's also making it difficult to enjoy goals. You have to hold your breath after each goal, even if your team spent 45 seconds cycling in the zone prior to the goal, because you just never know if someone was offsides by the skin of their teeth on the entry. It's silly.

 

[Adele Dazeem]

That's a mistake that rarely happens. I'm talking about missing it by that much but the thing is, the flow of the game was kept in check. It's not like he was just hanging out in the offensive zone "cheating" for an easy chance.

Yeah because that happens often, right? Actually, it never happens.

 

[CharasLazyWrister]

I hate it. It's ridiculous and i'm not an Avs fan. Colorado had goals called back 22 seconds and 13 seconds after the entries. Challenges should be restricted to plays in a which a goal occurs within 5 seconds of the entry. That would eliminate the egregious offsides that actually play a big factor in the goal, like on breakaways and odd-man rushes.

This does not make sense.

Why is an illegal entry into the zone somehow not illegal anymore because more time passes?

 

[Rodgerwilco]

Aside from the fact that loads of goals are being called back on offsides plays that have no factor on the actual play, it's also making it difficult to enjoy goals. You have to hold your breath after each goal, even if your team spent 45 seconds cycling in the zone prior to the goal, because you just never know if someone was offsides by the skin of their teeth on the entry. It's silly.

Literally every goal that happens after a puck has been brought in offside and has not been cleared has a factor on the play. That play would never happen in that specific way if not for the offside entry that should have stopped play. What you are suggesting is that basically a rule should become void after a certain arbitrary period of time has elapsed, which is more silly than anything relating to offside review.

It seems a bit dramatic to me for people to say they hold their breath after every goal because review exists. Most entries on plays that result in goals are pretty obvious to tell if it's even close.

I think the objective should be to get as close to perfect as they can, and the offside review allows for this. Fans feelings don't, and shouldn't, play into how the game is officiated, IMO. If you want to argue against offside being a rule, then that's a different, and more logical, argument.

 

[Unspecified]

To even put that in is the most silliest things ever. It's like, lets be technical just to be technical.

I believe in the spirit of the rule. Have a guy half a step offsides is not what the rule makers had in mind. PERIOD.

Sounds like your team was the victim of one of these bad calls that inadvertently affected a team you support from progressing to the 2nd round?

 

[westc2]

The offside coach's challenge absolutely needs to be removed. If it's so close that the ref doesn't notice it during gameplay, then it should be left alone. There are countless little things that happen during a game that COULD be reviewed or challenged, but they are not, so why is offsides?

 

[Peltz]

Have a guy half a step offsides is not what the rule makers had in mind. PERIOD.

Really? Let's call and ask them. Oh wait, we can't.

Well I say it should be strictly enforced to require players to score with precision.

 

[Empoleon8771]

The job of the refs should be to call the game by the wording of the rulebook. Offsides reviews allow for the refs to correct a missed call that they had.

Offsides isn't subjective, especially not in this case.

The offside coach's challenge absolutely needs to be removed. If it's so close that the ref doesn't notice it during gameplay, then it should be left alone. There are countless little things that happen during a game that COULD be reviewed or challenged, but they are not, so why is offsides?

This is a dumb argument. Refs are people, they make mistakes. A game ruined by a missed call is infinitely worse than a review that corrects that missed call.

And yes, there are already a ton of things that can be reviewed. Every goal is reviewed in Toronto to make sure it crossed the line. Coaches can challenge for offsides, goalie interference and hand passes,

 

[Empoleon8771]

The "if a ref doesn't mention it, it should be left alone" argument is especially dumb to me. There have been countless examples of egregiously blown calls that directly influenced a game. Just a few examples from playoff games:

1. The major penalty against Vegas where Couture was highsticked by his own teammate
2. The Sharks goal that occurred directly following a hand-pass
3. Clear off-sides goals by Briere and Duchene
4. Blown whistle on a clear loose puck in the Penguins-Predators cup final
5. Ducks game winning goal against the Oilers where they basically just pushed Talbot into the net
6. Penguins goal against Columbus where Werenski was laying on the ice with a serious injury

Like refs make mistakes, trying to argue that it's better to keep those mistakes because "the refs didn't notice them" than to review them and fix the wrong calls is insane. It's just an illogical argument to make. The officials making a bad call to influence a game is an insanely worse outcome than situations like the Avs goal last night getting overturned.

 

[Sheppy]

I have this irrational hatred when people say “offsides”

It’s completely irrational but I can’t even help it.

 

[Svechhammer]

I would be in favor of tweaking the rule to say that if a goal is scored 20+ seconds after a missed offside, then it should still count. Teams shouldn't be bailed out for getting cratered in the defensive zone just because the refs missed a marginal call half a shift or more ago.

I'll also be in favor of putting a timer on the video review. If you can't determine the call after 15-20 seconds of looking at it on replay, it should stand as called on the ice.

 

[BlueOil]

Aside from the fact that loads of goals are being called back on offsides plays that have no factor on the actual play, it's also making it difficult to enjoy goals. You have to hold your breath after each goal, even if your team spent 45 seconds cycling in the zone prior to the goal, because you just never know if someone was offsides by the skin of their teeth on the entry. It's silly.

most goals don't get reviewed.

why is getting it right silly and allowing bad goals not silly?

 

[Dr Pepper]

The commenter was saying they made the right call in this case with 100% surety after review, not that they get the correct call 100% of the time in real-time.

As with many who oppose the reviews, it seems like your problem is with offside even being a rule in the sport, otherwise you wouldn't have a problem with them being correctly called. There is no such thing as "sorta offside"... either a play is or is not offside. It's one of the few black and white rules in the game.

I understand the spirit of the rule, as without it you'd just have players camped out in the offensive zone waiting for a pass and it would be anarchy.

What I don't like - and yes I understand it's black and white - is still the fact that a zone entry sometimes a minute prior to a goal being scored, can be analyzed and dissected six ways from Sunday just to see if a player's skate was on the blue paint.

"What's that? It looks like the skate's a couple centimeters past the line? Oh well no goal then, tough shit. Rules is rules."

And hey, it is what it is, coaches are going to apply the options given to them in situations such as this. That's just one area where I wish the human element (linesmen missing a fraction of an inch in real time) was left alone.

Like in baseball, are we soon going to see managers challenging strike calls? The viewers at home have a pitch tracker, imagine a manager stopping the game with a challenge and MLB HQ checks the replay to call it a strike.

 

[Frosty415]

Avs cried for the rule when the Sharks beat them with an close offside in a game 7.

So no, it's staying.

 

[nilan30]

He was offside by a few feet. It wasn't like it was an inch or something.

People complain about refs now and how they are too subjective, but now we want a concrete rule like offside to be subjective?

Which call is this referring to?

 

[alphahelix]

100% offside should just be subjective call by the linesman, total grey area as in the history of the game. If it’s close enough to look onside real time, then it stands. However, I think any call should be challenge-able in case the call on the ice is egregiously wrong. In case of a challenge, the referee gets to decide in conference with other refs and a time-limited iPad review (1 minute). If the call is egregiously wrong, it is reversed. If it is within the realm of grey area, where it is presumed reasonable that the linesman could have made the call that he did on the ice in real-time and did not miss the play entirely, then the call stands and a delay of game is assessed.

Again, this could apply to all calls, including roughings and slashing and whatever else If teams want to risk the delay of game. Busting out the measuring tape is against the spirit of the game and against the history of how every call was made for 100 years. The game is meant to be fast paced and this ticky tacky nonsense is bad for everyone.

 

[Rodgerwilco]

I understand the spirit of the rule, as without it you'd just have players camped out in the offensive zone waiting for a pass and it would be anarchy.

What I don't like - and yes I understand it's black and white - is still the fact that a zone entry sometimes a minute prior to a goal being scored, can be analyzed and dissected six ways from Sunday just to see if a player's skate was on the blue paint.

"What's that? It looks like the skate's a couple centimeters past the line? Oh well no goal then, tough shit. Rules is rules."

And hey, it is what it is, coaches are going to apply the options given to them in situations such as this. That's just one area where I wish the human element (linesmen missing a fraction of an inch in real time) was left alone.

Like in baseball, are we soon going to see managers challenging strike calls? The viewers at home have a pitch tracker, imagine a manager stopping the game with a challenge and MLB HQ checks the replay to call it a strike.

I guess I just don't quite agree with the logic behind people outright arguing that they want there to be more incorrect calls in the game because sometimes they feel weird if an offside happened after an arbitrary amount of time passes that has convinced them that the zone entry no longer affected the play. I also don't think that many people realize that they're actually arguing that they want more wrong calls.

As silly as your italicized portion sounds, wouldn't you agree it sounds just as silly as:

"What's that? The play was clearly offside 6 inches past the line? Oh well, 12 seconds has passed and the offside rule no longer applies after 10 seconds of zone time, tough shit. Rules apparently are not rules and are sometimes not enforced."

 

[Dr Pepper]

I guess I just don't quite agree with the logic behind people outright arguing that they want there to be more incorrect calls in the game because sometimes they feel weird if an offside happened after an arbitrary amount of time passes that has convinced them that the zone entry no longer affected the play. I also don't think that many people realize that they're actually arguing that they want more wrong calls.

As silly as your italicized portion sounds, wouldn't you agree it sounds just as silly as:

"What's that? The play was clearly offside 6 inches past the line? Oh well, 12 seconds has passed and the offside rule no longer applies after 10 seconds of zone time, tough shit. Rules apparently are not rules and are sometimes not enforced."

I mean sure they wouldn't use that exact language (I would assume), but that's pretty much what it comes down to, no?

I would prefer a postgame statement, where applicable, that went along the lines of "The linesman clearly missed the call and the NHL will work harder on training officials who don't allow such blatant offside zone entries to occur prior to a goal - even if it's a full minute before any goal was scored".

That raises an interesting hypothetical.......can a coach challenge against his own team?

I'll use last night's play as an example; say Seattle brought the puck back and scored on a quick play.

Could Bednar argue that the play prior should've been blown dead because Compher, or whoever it was, was offside?

I mean, again, by the letter of the law the Avs WERE offside. If you're gonna enforce the rule, you want to be consistent about these things.

 

[BlueOil]

I mean sure they wouldn't use that exact language (I would assume), but that's pretty much what it comes down to, no?

I would prefer a postgame statement, where applicable, that went along the lines of "The linesman clearly missed the call and the NHL will work harder on training officials who don't allow such blatant offside zone entries to occur prior to a goal - even if it's a full minute before any goal was scored".

That raises an interesting hypothetical.......can a coach challenge against his own team?

I'll use last night's play as an example; say Seattle brought the puck back and scored on a quick play.

Could Bednar argue that the play prior should've been blown dead because Compher, or whoever it was, was offside?

I mean, again, by the letter of the law the Avs WERE offside. If you're gonna enforce the rule, you want to be consistent about these things.

rules specify the challenge reason would need to be an off-side from the "attacking" team so i don't think this hypothetical is possible