GDT: 2/7/21 CAR Red Sweaters at CBJ Blue Jackets. Discuss.

[Weltschmerz]

Here is the official word:

"Columbus requested a coach's challenge for off-side prior to a goal at 18:45 of the second period.
During the review, a miscommunication occurred between the Video Replay Booth in Columbus, the Linesmen and the Situation Room and play resumed before all replays could be reviewed to confirm the off-side. The challenge by Columbus should have resulted in the Carolina goal being disallowed. Subsequently, Columbus was assessed a delay of game penalty. After confirmation in the intermission that the play was off-side, the remaining 0:45 of the delay of game penalty issued was rescinded to begin the third period."

kind of sad to be honest

at about 1:42 in the vid they show another zone entry that is onside, if you show that to the refs you get a quick decission



also look at torts when they explain it to him

 

[Nikishin Go Boom]

This is still idiotic. You have to just eat the call once you f*** it up. What if the Canes scored on the PP too before the period ended? Would they have admitted they f***ed up then? They took a massive screw yup, and they somehow made it worse.

They did make it worse by continuing to look at it. At least I know now the plane rule for offsides only applies to the feet not the whole player.

 

[Wolfpuck]

This is still idiotic. You have to just eat the call once you f*** it up. What if the Canes scored on the PP too before the period ended? Would they have admitted they f***ed up then? They took a massive screw yup, and they somehow made it worse.

Leave it to the NHL to go out of their way to stick their dick in the toaster.

 

[CanesFanBudMan]

They just need to get rid of offsides reviews. IMO the only thang that needs to be accurate with that level of granularity is pucks over the goal line.

Call offsides on the ice. Offsides and icings should be called the same way - there is no reason you should have to review an offsides for inches when literally 25 times a game someone clears it from 1-5 feet behind the redline and icing isn’t called.

if I am God for the day I get rid of reviews for offsides and make it so that actually have to gain the redline to not get called for icing

 

[Tryamw]

Leave it to the NHL to go out of their way to stick their dick in the toaster.

I thought it was a meat grinder... My bad...

 

[Wolfpuck]

I thought it was a meat grinder... My bad...

That's step 2.

 

[Nikishin Go Boom]

They just need to get rid of offsides reviews. IMO the only thang that needs to be accurate with that level of granularity is pucks over the goal line.

Call offsides on the ice. Offsides and icings should be called the same way - there is no reason you should have to review an offsides for inches when literally 25 times a game someone clears it from 1-5 feet behind the redline and icing isn’t called.

if I am God for the day I get rid of reviews for offsides and make it so that actually have to gain the redline to not get called for icing

Im fine with them reviewing offsides. I am firm believer in a sky ref for all sports.
They can buzz down and see that the player didnt have the red line, see other angles quicker on the screens, provide some tips on things to watch for during breaks that the other arent seeing, and frankly provide another perspective on penalty calls. It will keep the older refs in the game longer. All communication between the refs, sky or otherwise, are recorded and monitored by the league.

If the sky ref thinks something is close then Toronto gets involved for a review.

 

[Joe McGrath]

They just need to get rid of offsides reviews. IMO the only thang that needs to be accurate with that level of granularity is pucks over the goal line.

Call offsides on the ice. Offsides and icings should be called the same way - there is no reason you should have to review an offsides for inches when literally 25 times a game someone clears it from 1-5 feet behind the redline and icing isn’t called.

if I am God for the day I get rid of reviews for offsides and make it so that actually have to gain the redline to not get called for icing

Ive never correlated icing and offsides that way and I’ve been watching and playing hockey for over 30 years. Out of curiosity, are you either a newer hockey fan or one that has just never played?

You’re 100% right though. There’s no logic in calling icing that way and reviewing offsides for a half inch to take away goals. The league wants more goals, not less.

 

[CanesFanBudMan]

Ive never correlated icing and offsides that way and I’ve been watching and playing hockey for over 30 years. Out of curiosity, are you either a newer hockey fan or one that has just never played?

You’re 100% right though. There’s no logic in calling icing that way and reviewing offsides for a half inch to take away goals. The league wants more goals, not less.

Have played from mite - high school - just think they should both be made on the ice during play and not important enough for a review. The icing thing was just an example - either change the rule as it is written or call it as it is- IMO any extra subjectivity that can be should be removed (yes I know that some what contradicts my dislike of reviews)

 

[AD Skinner]

I didn't notice it as much live but watching highlights this morning boy was that a slick pass from trocheck to pesce on the goal that was but wasn't but actually was offside. On the backhand with great speed and accuracy from way up in the corner, then the rebound on top for just a great shift. Hes playing out of his mind

 

[CanesFanBudMan]

Im fine with them reviewing offsides. I am firm believer in a sky ref for all sports.
They can buzz down and see that the player didnt have the red line, see other angles quicker on the screens, provide some tips on things to watch for during breaks that the other arent seeing, and frankly provide another perspective on penalty calls. It will keep the older refs in the game longer. All communication between the refs, sky or otherwise, are recorded and monitored by the league.

If the sky ref thinks something is close then Toronto gets involved for a review.

I’m not opposed to an eye em in the sky if they can figure out a way to do it live

 

[hblueridgegal]

This about sums it up:

 

[LostInaLostWorld]

They just need to get rid of offsides reviews. IMO the only thang that needs to be accurate with that level of granularity is pucks over the goal line.

Call offsides on the ice. Offsides and icings should be called the same way - there is no reason you should have to review an offsides for inches when literally 25 times a game someone clears it from 1-5 feet behind the redline and icing isn’t called.

if I am God for the day I get rid of reviews for offsides and make it so that actually have to gain the redline to not get called for icing

My SO always calls out the no call icing when clearly the puck is behind the red line by a foot or two.

I hate the offsides review when the entry has no effect on the goal scored. The O could pass the puck around for 20 seconds, battle on boards then score but it's disqualified after the 2 minute frame by frame review shows a skate 2 inches in front. If one slow mo review isn't definitive after one look let the call stand.

 

[Joe McGrath]

Have played from mite - high school - just think they should both be made on the ice during play and not important enough for a review. The icing thing was just an example - either change the rule as it is written or call it as it is- IMO any extra subjectivity that can be should be removed (yes I know that some what contradicts my dislike of reviews)

Interesting. You’re just my prone to logical thought than I apparently.

I think the biggest issue with icing being a precise call is it’s difficult for the linesman to be in any kind of position to make that determination. If there’s a potential icing happening at the red line they need to be hauling ass to the blue line to call the potential offsides that’s just as likely.

 

[CanesFanBudMan]

Interesting. You’re just my prone to logical thought than I apparently.

I think the biggest issue with icing being a precise call is it’s difficult for the linesman to be in any kind of position to make that determination. If there’s a potential icing happening at the red line they need to be hauling ass to the blue line to call the potential offsides that’s just as likely.

Don’t disagree. Just don’t see the point of being so legalistic about offsides and not so many other things. A missed offsides 15 seconds before a goal causing a review goes against the intent of the rule.

Haha - my wife agrees with you about the logical thought

 

[Tryamw]

Miscommunication explained: How chaos led to botched call against Blue Jackets

More on the mistake.

 

[Chrispy]

Here is the official word:

"Columbus requested a coach's challenge for off-side prior to a goal at 18:45 of the second period.
During the review, a miscommunication occurred between the Video Replay Booth in Columbus, the Linesmen and the Situation Room and play resumed before all replays could be reviewed to confirm the off-side. The challenge by Columbus should have resulted in the Carolina goal being disallowed. Subsequently, Columbus was assessed a delay of game penalty. After confirmation in the intermission that the play was off-side, the remaining 0:45 of the delay of game penalty issued was rescinded to begin the third period."

kind of sad to be honest

So now we get to review the review?

What happens if the 2nd review is also incorrect? How many reviews do we get before they say Sorry, We ****** Up?

 

[Nikishin Go Boom]

So it was a Columbus’ employee that was at fault. Covid involved too. Crazy.

I understand there isn’t a precedent for reversing goals. I am torn about making it a precedent. Once you open pandora’s box, it is very hard to contain the ensuing chaos.

 

[Nikishin Go Boom]

So now we get to review the review?

What happens if the 2nd review is also incorrect? How many reviews do we get before they say Sorry, We ****** Up?

You have the Athletic? If so, they break it down. It wasn’t the league’s fault but a Nationwide Arena video trainee

 

[Chrispy]

You have the Athletic? If so, they break it down. It wasn’t the league’s fault but a Columbus video trainee

Yes, so you put out a statement after the game admitting the error and moving on. You don't retroactively review the review and change the call. That opens up a huge can of worms for the future.

 

[Nikishin Go Boom]

Yes, so you put out a statement after the game admitting the error and moving on. You don't retroactively review the review and change the call. That opens up a huge can of worms for the future.

I agree. I do understand the league's reason for it. I am glad they did not start a new precedent by erasing that goal. That is the much larger can of worms that should be thoroughly broken down for limits before it is ever considered. Im not saying that just because it benefited the Canes.

 

[VAcaniac]

I concur. Offside reviews are stupid.

theoretically bad calls should break evenly anyway.

 

[hblueridgegal]

Sounds like a SNL skit:

“We were trying to get the guys’ attention downstairs, to stop the linesmen before they could resume play,” Campbell said. “We were screaming into the headsets, ‘Get ’em back on there, get ’em back on!’ because (the off-ice official in the penalty box) usually just puts the headphones right back on his own head (after a linesman uses them).”
But under the NHL’s COVID protocols, the penalty-box official is charged with sterilizing the headsets before they can be worn by somebody else, and he began doing this immediately as the officials skated away to announce their ruling.
For a minute or more as he cleaned, Campbell said, the official was oblivious to NHL executives bellowing into the headset, nor did he notice the strobe light that had been turned on to get the attention of somebody at ice level.

 

[Lempo]

Sounds like a SNL skit:

Or a horror movie. Voiceless people screaming behind the soundproff glass at the oblivious victim-to-be.

 

[Lempo]