Why are there so many incorrect review calls?

[NotAVacuumSalesman]

To be human is to make mistakes. Everyone makes mistakes. It’s just what we do.

Nobody is perfect. Get over it.

 

[Hint1k]

Of course you need to bring supporting arguments... What makes you think I don't support that?

You talk as if these refs were working in some highly specialized field not accessible to common mortals, when all we talk about here is if a puck crossed a line or not, if a stick was too high, if a goalie got pushed, etc. Breaking news : these "professional" knowledges are accessible to a lot of people. Not need to rely on the authority argument here.

Secondly, on many types of calls, especially goalie interference, we talk about highly subjective rules subjected to human judgement. There's rarely a "black or white" kind of truth here. You talk as if humans had no biases, no bad day at work, no different interpretation of the same rule, etc. I'm sorry but, many decisions in the past have been highly controversial, and often blatantly wrong. Wanna talk about the Brett Hull goal? The Alain Côté non goal?

To think mistakes never happen is simply dumb. But I wish I was living in your unicorn world.

That is not how anything works.

Simple example:
2 + 2 = 4.
Anyone has a right to say - this equation is incorrect.

And then bring a different math system where "2" actually means "1" and "1" means "2".
And using that new system show that 2 + 2 = 1 not 4.

However, one would need to have the whole humankind agree with that new math system. Until that happened - such opinion is wrong. It contradicts known facts.

That is how everything works.

What you think were mistakes - were in fact correct decisions. The humankind never agreed with you in the first place.

 

[PlayersLtd]

With how cheap, small, and high quality cameras are nowadays you could easily have like 4-6 cameras stationed at crossbar level around the offensive zone and never get a high-tech call wrong again.

You could literally have a go pro style camera embedded in every stanchion around the rink.

It seems like wrong calls in the NHL is a feature and not a bug at this point.

It is obvious that they do not care about getting calls right.

I guess that begs the question then what vested interest is there in getting calls wrong?

 

[Soundwave]

I guess that begs the question then what vested interest is there in getting calls wrong?

Their logic is probably something stupid, ie: too many cameras would require too much time to review, so we'll purposefully have fewer cameras and if you can't get a conclusive call from that, then too bad.

 

[sting101]

Look at tampas first goal today. I just don't see how you could possibly call that a good goal.

Yes and then the NHL cherry on top. How dare you challenge.... shorthanded and down 2-0 take that.

Of course could just review scoring plays like big boy leagues do and avoid the joke scenario but nah

 

[Hint1k]

Their logic is probably something stupid, ie: too many cameras would require too much time to review, so we'll purposefully have fewer cameras and if you can't get a conclusive call from that, then too bad.

You are talking about perfection.

That is not how humans operate. The decisions are made based on the limitation of resources. Time, money, energy, abilities of materials and human bodies - they all have limits.

Therefore the perfection is not realistically achievable and not really needed. Instead humans go for "good enough" option.

NHL teams do not need to win 82-0 and then 16-0 to get the cup.

Something like 50-32 in regular season and 16-12 in playoffs is good enough to achieve the same result and much easy to do.

You should think about that before creating conspiracy theories.

 

[Nogatco Rd]

Do we know if the replays shown on TV are the exact same ones that Toronto uses? Or does the video review HQ have access to additional camera angles not shown on the broadcast? Could explain some of the apparent discrepancy.

 

[Nogatco Rd]

With how cheap, small, and high quality cameras are nowadays you could easily have like 4-6 cameras stationed at crossbar level around the offensive zone and never get a high-tech call wrong again.

You could literally have a go pro style camera embedded in every stanchion around the rink.

It seems like wrong calls in the NHL is a feature and not a bug at this point.

It is obvious that they do not care about getting calls right.

According to the NHL, that infrastructure is pretty much already in place.

“The NHL has spent the past decade exploring new tech to gather new data. Puck and Player Tracking became fully operational in 2021-22, with up to 20 cameras in each arena and infrared emitters in each puck and sweater. The cameras detect infrared signals from the pucks up to 60 times per second and the players up to 15 times per second, generating millions of raw location data points.”

Certainly the elevation of the puck relative to the crossbar is something that can be extrapolated from those IR cameras. Whether or not that info is currently being made available in real time to assist replay officials, I have no idea.

Whether it’s drawn from the “Edge” system or via a separate setup, I have no doubt that virtually every team has an IR/HD Video and/or LIDAR setup to record and analyze games and player/team performance.

 

[Score08]

I guess that begs the question then what vested interest is there in getting calls wrong?

Manipulation/control of the betting line?

 

[Bank Shot]

I guess that begs the question then what vested interest is there in getting calls wrong?

I dont think they are doing it on purpose.

I just think they are an unserious and unprofessional league and because they lack professionalism, they don't see the importance of getting calls right as often as humanly possible.

They don't understand, or don't care that when calls appear to be arbitrary, it really gives the fans that see favoritism or conspiracy theories of supporting certain teams a leg to stand on.

There is tonnes of evidence of this stuff from Colin Campbell's emails where he was complaining to the director of officiating about calls made against his son's team in the playoffs, to executives calling players "p***yes", to the NHL hiring Pronger, a guy who once stomped an opponent with his skate into the DEPARTMENT OF PLAYER SAFETY.

 

[WeaponOfChoice]

During the game the replays showed the stick was at crossbar height.

My dad thought it was no goal but I told him that angle was inconclusive

 

[WatchfulElm]

That is not how anything works.

Simple example:
2 + 2 = 4.
Anyone has a right to say - this equation is incorrect.

And then bring a different math system where "2" actually means "1" and "1" means "2".
And using that new system show that 2 + 2 = 1 not 4.

However, one would need to have the whole humankind agree with that new math system. Until that happened - such opinion is wrong. It contradicts known facts.

That is how everything works.

What you think were mistakes - were in fact correct decisions. The humankind never agreed with you in the first place.

The humankind disagreed? WTF are you talking about?

So Brett Hull goal was good because "humankind" disagreed with me? (Even though 100% of people thought it was the wrong call... except you apparently) Is this your argument?

Also, you need to get a grasp on concepts like objectivity vs subjectivity. Many hockey decisions are subjective, especially when it comes to goalie interference. It's not as simple as 1+1=2. It's often a matter of opinion, interpretation, bias, values, judgement, available technologies, etc. So mistakes are 100% possible. Hundreds of people have been wrongly convicted for crimes they didn't commit, by "experts" in their field. That is, until new technologies arise or sometimes because the people in place had tunnel vision.

Humans make mistakes. Even those in powerful position. Even experts in their field. I shouldn't have to explain this to you.

Also I'm done, this is a silly debate.

 

[Mike C]

What you just wrote is a conspiracy theory. The problem with all such theories - they are not based on facts. Hence the name.

So unless you have some facts that Toronto situation room was bribed or influenced by someone and it was recorded and you have such recording...


Your message looks like this:

1) You watched an episode from the game. You don't know rules. You are not a pro ref. And you have some opinion.

2) Multiple pro refs watched the same episode from different angles, frame by frame. And they have a different opinion.

I suggest you to think it through.

Here's your conspiracy theory in a nutshell


FAN DUEL DOT COM. (Odds at the top of your screen)

Now down to Emily Kaplan with more

 

[GeeoffBrown]

I think it's best to consider Toronto reviews a coin flip. Edmonton won the game anyway

 

[Golden_Jet]

Would also like to see the other angles, that they have.

Does it hit the second stick behind it as well, (goalies stick?)

 

[PlayersLtd]

Their logic is probably something stupid, ie: too many cameras would require too much time to review, so we'll purposefully have fewer cameras and if you can't get a conclusive call from that, then too bad.

Sounds like appropriate logic to me. You have to consider the delay to the game and since 100% infallibility is impossible to achieve the good enough line needs to be drawn somewhere.

Perhaps it is our lust for perfection that is in fact misplaced.

 

[OrangePMD]

I'm always impressed that in 2024, a pro league with billions of dollars of income, that can implement digital ads on boards, still has to rely on crappy pixelated video reviews with bad angles to determine if a goal is good or not, instead of having some kind of chip inside the puck that would collect live data about the puck exact position, movement and contacts. But maybe I'm just stupid for thinking such a technology would be easily available.

The answer is already in your post; income. The digital ads and the ability to have different ads for different markets, created more income. Implementation of that tech was worth it. The kind of review tech fans want, is going to be expensive, with very little to no forseeable financial gain.

Also, the digital ads have improved since the inital roll out, but they were very buggy early on. Any sort of goalline/offside/crossbar would have to be effectively flawless from the get go.

 

[GreatSaveEssensa]

That is not how anything works.

Simple example:
2 + 2 = 4.
Anyone has a right to say - this equation is incorrect.

And then bring a different math system where "2" actually means "1" and "1" means "2".
And using that new system show that 2 + 2 = 1 not 4.

However, one would need to have the whole humankind agree with that new math system. Until that happened - such opinion is wrong. It contradicts known facts.

That is how everything works.

What you think were mistakes - were in fact correct decisions. The humankind never agreed with you in the first place.

In your attempt to try and sound smarter than everybody else you are failing miserably.

 

[jeblers]

What I don't understand is why they video reviewed the goal, since the Oilers never challenged the goal in the first place.

 

[DearDiary]

What I don't understand is why they video reviewed the goal, since the Oilers never challenged the goal in the first place.

High stick goals are not part of the coach's challenge. That's for plays that should have resulted in a whistle. Meaning something like a player high sticking the puck to pass to another player who scores. All infractions that directly caused a goal like kicking the puck in are automatically reviewed.

 

[Score08]

It’s directly proportional to the nightly take the nhl front office gets from all the betting sites. When game management is no longer good enough, just make up rules as you go ! Tell the public what they’re actually seeing on tv isn’t really what they’re seeing.

 

[Hint1k]

The humankind disagreed? WTF are you talking about?

So Brett Hull goal was good because "humankind" disagreed with me? (Even though 100% of people thought it was the wrong call... except you apparently) Is this your argument?

Also, you need to get a grasp on concepts like objectivity vs subjectivity. Many hockey decisions are subjective, especially when it comes to goalie interference. It's not as simple as 1+1=2. It's often a matter of opinion, interpretation, bias, values, judgement, available technologies, etc. So mistakes are 100% possible. Hundreds of people have been wrongly convicted for crimes they didn't commit, by "experts" in their field. That is, until new technologies arise or sometimes because the people in place had tunnel vision.

Humans make mistakes. Even those in powerful position. Even experts in their field. I shouldn't have to explain this to you.

Also I'm done, this is a silly debate.

It is you who does not understand the concept of objectivity.

Here is the short explanation on how it works:
Someone said they invented a time machine. Now, how do you know that is a true fact and not a lie? Well, it is simple - you ask experts in the field - they test the machine and tell you the results.

Here is another example:
How do you know that something is a goal or no goal? It is the same process - you ask experts - the refs in Toronto situation room - to tell you about it.

Do experts make mistakes? Sure everyone does. How do you prove that an expert made a mistake - by bringing more experts who can check it.

And here is the news for you - you, your friends, your co-workers, NHL coaches, tv commentators and HF posters - are not such experts.

P.s.
So, until you brought here a group of actual experts who say the refs in the situation room did multiple mistakes - you are wrong.