Time to get rid of offsides review

[MrHeiskanen]

Just make it a 30 second review and then only obvious missed calls and mistakes will be corrected and these two centimeter calls won't exist.

 

[22Brad Park]

Just make it a 30 second review and then only obvious missed calls and mistakes will be corrected and these two centimeter calls won't exist.

Soon as defending team touches that puck it should be no challenges accepted.If they don't touch it and ends up in net challenge away.

 

[Strangle]

Watched hockey for almost 50 years. Many, many with no review. Said it many times and I will say it again….the only thing that should be reviewed is did a puck cross the goal line. Not offsides, not was it knocked in with a high stick or kicked in….nothing. Just did it cross the goal line. That’s it. All other calls stand as called.

I could live with this

 

[tarheelhockey]

I have to believe that the support for offside reviews comes from people who don’t remember the game before offside reviews.

 

[5 Minute Major]

Hooking, tripping, and roughing are all judgement calls.

As is offsides. The linesman judges whether it is or isn’t.

 

[Mandar]

Why not just stay onside?

 

[Spawn]

You aren’t an oilers fan you are a bitcher

Lol

 

[Asinine]

It's so lame. Completely kills the flow and energy of a game that's supposed to be fast-paced.

 

[DJN21]

Why not just stay onside?

wellllll....inertia, momentum.... a brain the size of Nick Cousins....theres plenty of reasons really...

 

[Albatros]

It's so lame. Completely kills the flow and energy of a game that's supposed to be fast-paced.

Endless advertisement breaks did, not the occasional review.

 

[Ghost of Murph]

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

Because the offside review is directly related to a goal that has been scored. A replay can clearly determine in 99% of cases whether a player was offside or not. Penalties are much more frequent in a game, are generally not involved directly with a scored goal, and even with review can be highly subjective. Just look at how controversial a lot of GI review decisions are. Offside is the easiest video review to determine.

 

[Ovie's Neighbor]

Because the offside review is directly related to a goal that has been scored. A replay can clearly determine in 99% of cases whether a player was offside or not. Penalties are much more frequent in a game, are generally not involved directly with a scored goal, and even with review can be highly subjective. Just look at how controversial a lot of GI review decisions are. Offside is the easiest video review to determine.

Except a lot of the time the offside is not directly related to a goal. It happens 20 seconds before the goal, the other team can possess the puck but not get it out. No different than a missed hook that leads to a turnover in front of the net and a goal.

 

[snag]

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

Because their an actual line in which to measure against

 

[AvroArrow]

Imagine crying because they got the call right, lmao

 

[Ovie's Neighbor]

Because their an actual line in which to measure against

OK and so is icing. Why not review missed icings that lead to a goal?

 

[Ghost of Murph]

Except a lot of the time the offside is not directly related to a goal. It happens 20 seconds before the goal, the other team can possess the puck but not get it out. No different than a missed hook that leads to a turnover in front of the net and a goal.

Fair enough. I've been in the camp since video reviews started that there should be a time limit after the puck crosses the line in relation to reviewing offside calls. 15 seconds would be fine with me.

 

[tarheelhockey]

Endless advertisement breaks did, not the occasional review.

Nobody ever ran an advertisement during an OT goal celebration.

 

[stealth1]

Fair enough. I've been in the camp since video reviews started that there should be a time limit after the puck crosses the line in relation to reviewing offside calls. 15 seconds would be fine with me.

I would take it a step further. For offside calls, they review the video in real time. Can't slow it down frame by frame.

 

[majormajor]

Yeah, sadly, the effect this has on the game is that you can no longer be excited about anything in the moment. What's the point in celebrating when the goal might get called off anyway? It really hurts the enjoyability of the sport.

Now that I think about it, this might even be the reason that I've been less excited about watching NHL lately. The fact that you can't trust any play happening in the moment and can't properly get emotional about good calls, bad calls, good goals, bad goals, until way after they happen, just takes away from the soul of the game.

The sudden joy in a goal is gone.

What an incredible thing to have lost.

 

[Anglesmith]

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 sure if I'm missing something, but puck possession is only relevant on calls involving the puck carrier's skates preceding the puck into the zone. This play has nothing to do with that.

 

[a mangy Meowth]

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?

That's only on delayed offside where the player leaves the zone as the other is about to enter. The player in question was entering the zone

 

[Albatros]

Nobody ever ran an advertisement during an OT goal celebration.

Good celebration shouldn't make a good goal. The NHL as mere entertainment can do what it wants, but hockey as a sport should emphasize getting it right.

 

[snag]

OK and so is icing. Why not review missed icings that lead to a goal?

Icing is a completely different beast.

 

[dire wolf]

Hooking, tripping, and roughing are all judgement calls.

Exactly - and they are more impactful than offside. Why is it so important to get the microscope out and delay the game for the sake of perfection? Sports are supposed to be entertaining. That's where the money comes from. If the review is diminishing the entertainment while not improving the game, they should get rid of it. Perfection should not be the goal. The goal should be to put out a good product. There was no video review for the first 90 years or so of the league and it worked great. Today in Buffalo, there were literally fans who were already outside of the arena thinking the game was over when they recalled the goal and went to a shootout. I was about to turn off the TV as they were switching over to the post-game show. So dumb.

Icing is a completely different beast.

It's different, but that doesn't mean it's less important. It's all situational. Most of these offside reviews are purely technical defaults that had no impact on the play. Sometimes an icing or missed icing can be hugely important - especially if the defending team has been on the ice a long time. I don't see why it should be treated so differently. What's so magical about offside? This all dates back to that one stupid game.

 

[snag]

It's different, but that doesn't mean it's less important. It's all situational. Most of these offside reviews are purely technical defaults that had no impact on the play. Sometimes an icing or missed icing can be hugely important - especially if the defending team has been on the ice a long time. I don't see why it should be treated so differently. What's so magical about offside? This all dates back to that one stupid game.

When do they wave off icing? It is all subjective AND interpretive. You aren't just measuring a puck crossing the goal line. Did someone touch the puck? Did it maybe glance off a stick? Were they really across the red line? There are two guys racing for the puck....oooh.....could be close.

And maybe then they also should review calls where a puck goes over the glass.....just to make sure it went over cleanly. I mean, a PP can be hugely important....or a PK be hugely detrimental.

Where does it stop?

And FTR.....I am in the reviews have gone too far camp. I agree....most of these offsides really gave sweet f a for an advantage. Like today's for example. The line is there to stop cherry picking....which if you need video review for it, it obviously isn't.