Time to get rid of offsides review

[Spawn]

This thread is made once a week and almost always by a fan that just had an offside review go against their team.

I'm an Oiler fan who had this particular offside review go my way.

I agree 100% with the OP.

If you need a frame by frame analysis and a 5x zoom to determine that the players trailing foot was offside by an inch it doesn't matter.

 

[stealth1]

Plays like today were the offside didn't affect the goal then it shouldn't be reviewed.

 

[sinDer]

I think offside reviews should continue. Just how they review offsides should change, something like if you can't see it clearly in slow motion without going frame by frame for 5minutes, the call on the ice stands. Take away the most obvious mistakes, and just accept that in a fast sport like hockey half inch of skate over the line doesn't matter

Can’t be like this.

You review it or you don’t. If you do, you do it right.

How could you decide what is an « acceptable » mistake and what is a big one? I think it would just be worse to do it like this.

 

[phrenssoa]

The freeze frame they showed as evidence of the offside showed the puck NOT touching Byram's stick as he entered the zone. Isn't that exactly the same thing they let go on the Makar goal during playoffs?

Not quite the same. The Makar play was essentially a delayed offside that was nullified once the player trapped in the o-zone touched back into the neutral zone.

I personally like the offside review as it allows the refs to let borderline plays go, knowing that there’s always the possibility of a review, which in a sense helps with the flow of the game, although I understand that it can also have the opposite effect. It also helps preserve the integrity of the game, which is a big positive for me.

 

[stealth1]

Can’t be like this.

You review it or you don’t. If you do, you do it right.

How could you decide what is an « acceptable » mistake and what is a big one? I think it would just be worse to do it like this.

An easy solution is all offside reviews are done at full speed. No going frame by frame.

 

[Kahvi]

Can’t be like this.

You review it or you don’t. If you do, you do it right.

How could you decide what is an « acceptable » mistake and what is a big one? I think it would just be worse to do it like this.

Acceptable mistake would be something that you can't see with your own eyes in replay. Same way that basically every other penalty is called, if referees can't see it, it's not a penalty. Sometimes they get it right, sometimes not.

One option I see would be to use sensors in pucks, skates, and sticks to track the position of the puck, but that might be too far away. Or use some automated image recognition software. In both cases that should be real-time results, but of course there's some margin of error anyway. Smaller than with human referees most likely.

 

[dire wolf]

Unless the offside leads *directly* to the goal, it had no effect on the play. Who cares if they missed the call. The refs miss calls all the time.

 

[KeydGV21]

I’d love to see the Venn diagram for “people who complain about officials missing calls” and “people who think a tool should be taken away from them”

 

[Ovie's Neighbor]

Horrible one in Caps game just now. Maybe offside by a millimeter.

 

[Asymmetric Solution]

Call wasn’t even indisputable. It was borderline and you can’t call back a gwg on a borderline call.

NHL seems to protect certain teams more than others.

 

[BruinsFan37]

I still say if the puck is carried offsides, and it's not caught by the linesmen as it happens, then it shouldn't be reviewable. A player being a few feet (nevermind less) offsides on the opposite side of the ice from the puck carrier isn't going to make much difference in the outcome of the play.

Offsides really should only be reviewable in the case of the refs missing a bad/flagrant pass offsides, and then only if a goal is scored.

 

[Schennanigans]

There’s alot of things to complain about the NHL. This is not one of those…

 

[Ghost of Murph]

Absolutely nothing wrong with trying to get the call right, even if it occasionally means waiting a few minutes to check. The same people whining about reviewing offside calls would be the same ones melting down if their team lost a playoff game because of a missed offside call.

 

[snag]

My opinion has always been to allow the situation room to intervene when they see a clear offsides in real time (as in Duchene a decade ago), but get rid of the coaches review. This can prevent the egregious offsides misses while also not having the freeze frames for a mm offsides.

Today was an embarrassment though. Toronto shouldn't be reviewing plays like that which in real time are at worse inconclusive. In 99.9% of missed offsides calls no material unfair advantage was gained.

I am a baseball purist to the extent when a person says "tie goes to the runner" I vibrate. There are no ties in baseball. Safe or out. That's all there is. So when replay came to ball I was like, "are you f***ing kidding me? "

First, they nickle and dime the game in certain aspects to speed it up.... And then they go and do that?

Part of sport is the human factor. That comes with blown calls either way from the ref in real time as they see it. It also means overcoming said adversity when a botched call happens.

So to go and take a look back in a frame by frame view which ultimately had nothing to do with the outcome is asinine. Hell, the players and refs all accepted it as a goal. I accepted it as a goal... I was in a phone call and moved on from the game when I was told "they're calling back..."

But then too, a rule is a rule. How do you decide when or where and to what degree to enforce it? It has to be either all or nothing.

People already bitch about missed calls, now imagine if someone was just allowed to arbitrarily go "meh" and not bother on one but then go after another near identical.

Video review in sport should really be scaled back. Like in football, did the receiver trap the ball. Hockey, did it cross the line. Baseball.... Just get rid of it.

That is unless of course it is used as a means of keeping your officials honest. Which in that case maybe they should grade ref performance and make that public instead.

 

[ijuka]

Absolutely nothing wrong with trying to get the call right, even if it occasionally means waiting a few minutes to check. The same people whining about reviewing offside calls would be the same ones melting down if their team lost a playoff game because of a missed offside call.

except these 2 millimeter offsides really don't offer any advantage in relation to being onside by 2 millimeters

And I definitely would prefer it if players didn't have to get called back from the dressing room after having celebrated their goal and winning the playoff series because someone was offside by half an inch.

 

[joestevens29]

I'm an Oiler fan who had this particular offside review go my way.

I agree 100% with the OP.

If you need a frame by frame analysis and a 5x zoom to determine that the players trailing foot was offside by an inch it doesn't matter.

You aren’t an oilers fan you are a bitcher

 

[Ghost of Murph]

except these 2 millimeter offsides really don't offer any advantage in relation to being onside by 2 millimeters

And I definitely would prefer it if players didn't have to get called back from the dressing room after having celebrated their goal and winning the playoff series because someone was offside by half an inch.

So what would be an acceptable distance in which to allow offside to be reviewed? And how would one measure it?

I remember the days before video review in which sometimes a goal counted after a player was 2 feet offside. It's a lot worse to have a situation like that than the super rare inconvenience of players having to come back on the ice because the league got the call right.

 

[LightningStorm]

I am a baseball purist to the extent when a person says "tie goes to the runner" I vibrate. There are no ties in baseball. Safe or out. That's all there is. So when replay came to ball I was like, "are you f***ing kidding me? "

First, they nickle and dime the game in certain aspects to speed it up.... And then they go and do that?

Part of sport is the human factor. That comes with blown calls either way from the ref in real time as they see it. It also means overcoming said adversity when a botched call happens.

So to go and take a look back in a frame by frame view which ultimately had nothing to do with the outcome is asinine. Hell, the players and refs all accepted it as a goal. I accepted it as a goal... I was in a phone call and moved on from the game when I was told "they're calling back..."

But then too, a rule is a rule. How do you decide when or where and to what degree to enforce it? It has to be either all or nothing.

People already bitch about missed calls, now imagine if someone was just allowed to arbitrarily go "meh" and not bother on one but then go after another near identical.

Video review in sport should really be scaled back. Like in football, did the receiver trap the ball. Hockey, did it cross the line. Baseball.... Just get rid of it.

That is unless of course it is used as a means of keeping your officials honest. Which in that case maybe they should grade ref performance and make that public instead.

I find reviews for whether the puck crossed the goal line to be the hockey equivalent to safe/out reviews in baseball. Offsides just doesn't have the same impact on the game as those 2. I'd find it like if baseball reviewed whether a baserunner running outside the basepath. Like offsides, if you can't see it in real time, no material unfair advantage was gained.

 

[SEALBound]

Nope. Either it's offsides or it isn't. An inch or a foot or a mile. Offsides is offsides. Challenges get the calls right.

Keeping them is 1000% the correct decision.

There is no good, reasonable, or logical argument for it. And "but much team lost" is not a reason. It's sour grapes and entitlement.

 

[5 Minute Major]

Nope. Either it's offsides or it isn't. An inch or a foot or a mile. Offsides is offsides. Challenges get the calls right.

Keeping them is 1000% the correct decision.

There is no good, reasonable, or logical argument for it. And "but much team lost" is not a reason. It's sour grapes and entitlement.

Well, hooking, tripping, roughing, high sticking….either is or isn’t, correct? Do we need to review those as well because those lead to power plays.

 

[hatterson]

Well, hooking, tripping, roughing, high sticking….either is or isn’t, correct? Do we need to review those as well because those lead to power plays.

Hooking, tripping, and roughing are all judgement calls.

 

[Hotep Numminen]

keep it for the playoffs but get rid of it for regular season games.

 

[22Brad Park]

Only issue I have with the offside challenges is when a team enters zone and play carries on & the defending team touched puck but don't get it out & puck ends up in net.Then they challenge and reverse it.The moment defending team touched it should be end of any challenging.

 

[Strangle]

The offsides review has long been an embarrassment, but today, the embarrassment may have peaked. The Sabres apparently beat the Oilers with 2 seconds left in overtime. Everyone had celebrated and moved into the locker room. TV had gone to commercial. Fans were making their way to the exits. Suddenly, out of the blue, Toronto buzzes in and says NO GOAL because twenty seconds earlier, there was an apparent, maybe, sort of offsides. This was that offsides.

View attachment 833209

The Sabres went on to win in a shootout, but the embarrassment for the league remains. It’s time to put these ridiculous replays to bed. It’s a bad look for everyone.

I think reviews should stay, but they shouldn’t make the reviews automatic

Make it part of the game and require the coach to challenge it.

I think you also need to make some amendments to the calling of a penalty for failing a review, though.

Like if it takes the refs longer than 3 minutes to figure out that you’re challenge failed, no penalty is called

 

[Ovie's Neighbor]

So what would be an acceptable distance in which to allow offside to be reviewed? And how would one measure it?

I remember the days before video review in which sometimes a goal counted after a player was 2 feet offside. It's a lot worse to have a situation like that than the super rare inconvenience of players having to come back on the ice because the league got the call right.

Why is that the rule though that you should interpret 100% to the letter of the law. Why not then review all penalties too.