The NHL needs to make all majors reviewable

[Dr Jan Itor]

Maybe not an auto review, but making them challengeable would probably be a good thing.

 

[kladorf2005]

allowed to ? I suppose. is he obligated to stop the play ? I don't think I've every seen a linesman call a major on his own. probably because He has no idea if what the ref saw. maybe the linesman thought it was a major and the ref saw it and thought that it wasnt.

if the linesman stops play there, that's jamming up the ref but good.

My point was, that if a linesman really saw a cross check to the head, then saw a lifeless Pavelski laying in a pool of blood, he should immediately blow the play dead for safety, correct? Doesn't have to be blowing it dead to call the penalty. Just blow it dead because he's human and someone's life could be in danger with every passing second he lays there without medical attention?

Of course, that would only apply if the linesman actually saw what is being reported he saw...

 

[sandysan]

My point was, that if a linesman really saw a cross check to the head, then saw a lifeless Pavelski laying in a pool of blood, he should immediately blow the play dead for safety, correct? Doesn't have to be blowing it dead to call the penalty. Just blow it dead because he's human and someone's life could be in danger with every passing second he lays there without medical attention?

Of course, that would only apply if the linesman saw what is being report he saw...

correct ? no
linesmen do not call penalties. The once exception is that they CAN be consulted by the ref, but they do not have to be. this usually happens when the refs think they didnt get a good look at it and my understading is if its a minor penalty, the linesman cannot say didly to the ref.

the linesmen's role in this is pretty well defined, and isnt trumped when a guy could be in danger.

if you think that the linesmen should have the prerogative to make penalty calls. that's a perfectly defensible position. but as of today, and yersterday they don't.

its bad enough now with two refs who disagree whether something is a penalty or not, you want to double down and take the opinion of 4 guys now ? with 4 people, its likely one of them sees every transgression as a penalty.

 

[Mr Hat]

SJ had no business winning this series. They were outplayed game 6 and 7. Jones came in clutch game 6, and the refs/linesman made the worst call in recent memory to allow game 7 to slip away.

Does VGK deserve some flack for their brutal response to the major penalty? Sure but the refs pulled the lynch pin on that grenade. If it wasn't for that, im sure SJ would have pushed and scored a goal or two but almost zero chance they come out on top.

Likely the most tainted series win of this generation. For a split second I was happy to be a Sens fan and not a VGK fan which is crazy talk!

 

[MikeK]

SJ had no business winning this series. They were outplayed game 6 and 7. Jones came in clutch game 6, and the refs/linesman made the worst call in recent memory to allow game 7 to slip away.

Does VGK deserve some flack for their brutal response to the major penalty? Sure but the refs pulled the lynch pin on that grenade. If it wasn't for that, im sure SJ would have pushed and scored a goal or two but almost zero chance they come out on top.

Likely the most tainted series win of this generation. For a split second I was happy to be a Sens fan and not a VGK fan which is crazy talk!

Agreed. I'm not a supporting fan of either team but I am a fan of the game and what happened last night is right up there with one of the worst moments I've ever seen in any playoff game in any sport ever.

We all talk about the refs stealing games or this and that about the officiating but this blown call is that very definition. It is without question an embarrassing disgrace and the NHL should be ashamed of it. Moments like that are what change how things are done.

Never again should a ref have the ability to call a major without review or the war room involvement. I have no idea how a ref group could make a call like that in a game 7 without exact knowledge on what happened. It is beyond me and unthinkable. Again, totally embarrassing and it hurts the integrity of the game.

 

[kladorf2005]

correct ? no
linesmen do not call penalties. The once exception is that they CAN be consulted by the ref, but they do not have to be. this usually happens when the refs think they didnt get a good look at it and my understading is if its a minor penalty, the linesman cannot say didly to the ref.

the linesmen's role in this is pretty well defined, and isnt trumped when a guy could be in danger.

if you think that the linesmen should have the prerogative to make penalty calls. that's a perfectly defensible position. but as of today, and yersterday they don't.

its bad enough now with two refs who disagree whether something is a penalty or not, you want to double down and take the opinion of 4 guys now ? with 4 people, its likely one of them sees every transgression as a penalty.

I didn't say blow it dead to call the penalty. I said blow it dead because a person could literally be dead. I want to know why the linesman didn't blow his whistle when he supposedly saw a cross check to the head that resulted in Pavelski literally laying still in a pool of blood?

I don't care about his opinion on the penalty. I care about him being a human and getting Pavelski medical attention as soon as possible if he really did see what is being claimed he saw.

 

[sandysan]

I didn't say blow it dead to call the penalty. I said blow it dead because a person could literally be dead. I want to know why the linesman didn't blow his whistle when he supposedly saw a cross check to the head that resulted in Pavelski literally laying still in a pool of blood?

I don't care about his opinion on the penalty. I care about him being a human and getting Pavelski medical attention as soon as possible if he really did see what is being claimed he saw.

linesmen are a pretty rough and tumble crew, they have seen a lot and guys get hurt a lot.
if you can get a lineman to blow his whistle to stop play, you will gets lots of guys pretending to be more hurt than they are.

 

[kladorf2005]

linesmen are a pretty rough and tumble crew, they have seen a lot and guys get hurt a lot.
if you can get a lineman to blow his whistle to stop play, you will gets lots of guys pretending to be more hurt than they are.

My underlying argument is that I don't believe for one second that the linesman (or any of the 4) saw what happened. Because if they did, play would not have continued for as long as it did.

Ultimately, it was the linesman on the near blueline that came in a blew it dead. So clearly he doesn't have to wait for the referee to stop play. An injury like that warrants immediate stoppage. And if the linesman had seen it 5 seconds sooner, I fully believe he would have blown his whistle 5 seconds sooner.

The NHL is trying to cover their ass by saying one of the 4 officials saw a cross check to the head. Because they know damn well that what actually happened cannot justify a major penalty being called on that play.

 

[sandysan]

My underlying argument is that I don't believe for one second that the linesman (or any of the 4) saw what happened. Because if they did, play would not have continued for as long as it did.

Ultimately, it was the linesman on the near blueline that came in a blew it dead. So clearly he doesn't have to wait for the referee to stop play. An injury like that warrants immediate stoppage. And if the linesman had seen it 5 seconds sooner, I fully believe he would have blown his whistle 5 seconds sooner.

The NHL is trying to cover their ass by saying one of the 4 officials saw a cross check to the head. Because they know damn well that what actually happened cannot justify a major penalty being called on that play.

again if it was the linesman who saw this, it has to be a major. that's his only choice. if he thinks its a minor, he's not supposed to say peep to the ref.

and what precisely is " an injury like that"? pavs was off balance ran into stasny and fell awkwardly. you want the linesmen to blow play dead everytime someone falls weird ? how often you think that happens in a game ?

 

[Soundwave]

In the playoffs yeah I think so. Either that or the coach should be able to use a coach's challenge in that situation and force the refs to look at it again.

 

[kladorf2005]

again if it was the linesman who saw this, it has to be a major. that's his only choice. if he thinks its a minor, he's not supposed to say peep to the ref.

and what precisely is " an injury like that"? pavs was off balance ran into stasny and fell awkwardly. you want the linesmen to blow play dead everytime someone falls weird ? how often you think that happens in a game ?

The claim is that the linesman saw a cross check to the head. IF that's true, then presumably he saw Pavelsky laying lifeless in a pool of blood. The moment, the linesman sees that, he should blow it dead. Has nothing to do with "falling weird"

And stop talking about major/minor and linesman talking to the referee. I'm not arguing any of that. I'm arguing blowing it dead for safety. Not to call a penalty.

 

[tny760]

Never again should a ref have the ability to call a major without review or the war room involvement. I have no idea how a ref group could make a call like that in a game 7 without exact knowledge on what happened. It is beyond me and unthinkable. Again, totally embarrassing and it hurts the integrity of the game.

i always kind of admired the way rugby leagues handle penalties where they take note of something happening, gather the other refs, discuss and debate with the guy in the video room then all discuss what they think a fair penalty is.. gather the captains, explain it to them and the accused players and dole out the penalty

if someone objects to the call or thinks it was instigated otherwise, they can put the play on notice and the league reviews it afterwards

hockey penalties are so emotional and angry when imo some rugby penalties are much more violent and objectionable

 

[JoeThorntonsRooster]

The Ducks weren't even in the 4 games long enough for Sharks fans to get annoyed by baldy.

Underrated response.

 

[sandysan]

The claim is that the linesman saw a cross check to the head. IF that's true, then presumably he saw Pavelsky laying lifeless in a pool of blood. The moment, the linesman sees that, he should blow it dead. Has nothing to do with "falling weird"

And stop talking about major/minor and linesman talking to the referee. I'm not arguing any of that. I'm arguing blowing it dead for safety. Not to call a penalty.

so you want the everyone to call the play deas when someone might be hurt ? in a physical game like hockey ? and with the embellishers now, you are okay with a guy faking a heart attack to get a stoppage ?

pavelski fell awkwardly. he ended up injured, lots of guys fall awkwardsly and dont. you want to whistle them ALL down based on " what if's?"

 

[eramosat]

SJ had no business winning this series. They were outplayed game 6 and 7. Jones came in clutch game 6, and the refs/linesman made the worst call in recent memory to allow game 7 to slip away.

Does VGK deserve some flack for their brutal response to the major penalty? Sure but the refs pulled the lynch pin on that grenade. If it wasn't for that, im sure SJ would have pushed and scored a goal or two but almost zero chance they come out on top.

Likely the most tainted series win of this generation. For a split second I was happy to be a Sens fan and not a VGK fan which is crazy talk!

I would change the analogy. Refs handed the grenade to the Knights, pin in place. Sharks pulled it...and 7 seconds later (even though Knights had already killed off 6 perfect minutes of 4-on-5 that game), the explosion went off. And seems like it blew up a few grenades the Knights were carrying in their equipment.

1 in a million occurrence. No need to change officiating approach because of this. Although I would be interested to see what a shared responsibility between on-ice and in-the-Replay-room officials could be, pretty easy for a video guy to call a ref and say 'this happened, take it into account' or vice versa a ref to call them and ask 'what did you see'; and please leave coaches and teams 100% out of the equation, no more challenges are needed at all!

 

[Ratelleitlikeitis]

was a 2 min penalty but hey man, you guys capitalized and then some. Thats talent

dont feel dirty that the refs are idiots

I'd say it's more luck and good fortune than talent.

 

[Ratelleitlikeitis]

I would change the analogy. Refs handed the grenade to the Knights, pin in place. Sharks pulled it...and 7 seconds later (even though Knights had already killed off 6 perfect minutes of 4-on-5 that game), the explosion went off. And seems like it blew up a few grenades the Knights were carrying in their equipment.

1 in a million occurrence. No need to change officiating approach because of this. Although I would be interested to see what a shared responsibility between on-ice and in-the-Replay-room officials could be, pretty easy for a video guy to call a ref and say 'this happened, take it into account' or vice versa a ref to call them and ask 'what did you see'; and please leave coaches and teams 100% out of the equation, no more challenges are needed at all!

Let's see how you'd feel if the next 1 in a million takes out your team.

 

[eramosat]

i always kind of admired the way rugby leagues handle penalties where they take note of something happening, gather the other refs, discuss and debate with the guy in the video room then all discuss what they think a fair penalty is.. gather the captains, explain it to them and the accused players and dole out the penalty

if someone objects to the call or thinks it was instigated otherwise, they can put the play on notice and the league reviews it afterwards

hockey penalties are so emotional and angry when imo some rugby penalties are much more violent and objectionable

This X 1000...rugby handles calls that benefit from a video review so well, allowing on-ice officials to be in charge but still benefit from that advice, quickly and fairly. Might easily replace all coach's challenges and deliver a much more fairly called game. I hope NHL has some thoughts in that direction.

 

[PensPlz]

Ref: "I want to call a 5 minute major on this."

-Ref skates over to the booth, calls Toronto-

Ref: "Hey Toronto, is it cool I call 5 minute major on this play"

Toronto, watching every game real time and seeing the replays: "Yes/No"

Simple as that.

And the f***-all with the stuff that "this will lead to every call being reviewed"... no. Only the rare 5 minute major penalties that allows another team to score as many times as they want, and also kicks a player out of the game.

These are the calls that they need to get right because they potentially have the biggest impact on the game.

 

[Mr Hat]

I would change the analogy. Refs handed the grenade to the Knights, pin in place. Sharks pulled it...and 7 seconds later (even though Knights had already killed off 6 perfect minutes of 4-on-5 that game), the explosion went off. And seems like it blew up a few grenades the Knights were carrying in their equipment.

1 in a million occurrence. No need to change officiating approach because of this. Although I would be interested to see what a shared responsibility between on-ice and in-the-Replay-room officials could be, pretty easy for a video guy to call a ref and say 'this happened, take it into account' or vice versa a ref to call them and ask 'what did you see'; and please leave coaches and teams 100% out of the equation, no more challenges are needed at all!

I get the resistance to add more challenges and complications to the game but as another poster mentioned other sports go about this a more controlled way. It's simple enough to need head office approval for a 5 min major in the regular season and playoffs. It takes the emotion out of these reaction calls in the heat of the moment. Unfortunately hockey is too fast paced for refs to keep up in real time and their judgement is constantly in question. They need help.

 

[Huck Cheever]

Was a good call

Gutless plays like crosschecking should be 5min majors.

 

[rmthomson21]

If you look at it from the perspective of how many goals you'd expect to give up killing a major, which I'd imagine hovers around .6 or .7 (this can be argued, but it's less than one goal), there'd be a lot less controversy here. For example, this call in isolation was probably less impactful to the outcome of the game than the missed high stick on VGK's 2nd goal.

 

[Flyrs21]

At worst it's a 2 minute penalty but does this mean if a player trips another player, he hits another player and his head hits the ice, is it going to be a 5 minute major for tripping?

 

[Jdavidev]

If they called it interference instead of crosscheck, then 5 minute major is correct call. No more video reviews. They still haven't got the other ones right yet.

 

[goflyakite]

(Some) Sharks fans few days ago: "We were robbed!!!11!!"

(Some, probably the same) Sharks fans today: "Good teams overcome bad calls, stop whining".

Never change, HF, never change.

Or equally relative:

(Some) Knights fans a few days ago: “Good teams overcome bad calls, stop whining.”

(Some) Knights fans today: “We were robbed!!!11!!”

Unless this was meant to poke fun at literally every fan base, in which case I apologize. If it was meant to prove San Jose fans are exclusive in this type of hypocrisy than lmao.

Also I’ve never agreed with the line of thinking of “good teams overcome bad calls/controversy/etc.”. I think a lot of the time it’s actually the opposite, cup winning teams and organizations aren’t constantly battling through those kind of things. I think that way of thinking comes from fan bases of successful teams which just ignore all the good calls they receive.

While this was an unlucky play for Pavelski, this is probably the worst 5 min major call I’ve ever seen. That being said, you can’t give up 4 goals on one pk.

I look forward to the hockey gods smiting sj eventually to balance this atrocious call...

But what if that major penalty still hasn’t fully repaid the dept the hockey gods owed Sharks in that series let alone in the teams history? I think they’re still due to receive some good calls lol

Hypothetically, let's say Pav's had stepped on Eakin's stick and lands on his head. Is that a major for tripping since it resulted in a head injury?

Well, no, because stepping on someone’s stick that isn’t/shouldn’t be a penalty in the first place. On the other hand, forcefully crosschecking someone wth your stick is.

huh? You are correct that they weren't originally going to call anything. But they never went to video review. They never called Toronto. All they did was huddle up and discuss who saw what.

Supposedly one of them saw a cross check to the head and that's why they decided to call it a major. Whether or not that's true, I don't know. But I do know they did not go to video review in any way at all

*According to the always honest Gallant.

Today I learned that the refs talking to each other means a video review. Why do we employ those clowns in Toronto then?!?

I ask myself 99% of the time they come back with their decision. The league would be better off flipping a coin than going to the situation room.