Why isn’t icing enforced to the inch like offside.

[CowMix]

The real question is why don't we treat offside like icing. That's really what the NHL should be doing. If it's so close that a linesmen can't tell if it's offside or not then it's not a significant advantage that lead to the goal. The intent of offside rules doesn't change if it's not enforced perfectly down to the inch in a slow motion replay.

 

[Toby91ca]

Guy dumps the puck in from two feet behind the red line. No ice. Close enough. Not even controversial.

Given how fast the game is now, could you argue that a missed icing call is as material as a missed offside call?

I think the simple reason is that icings are judgmental and offsides are not. Shooting it from behind the red line, all the way down past the goal line doesn't = icing, there are other variables that need to be considered.

 

[MrHeiskanen]

Simple solution is to have AI make all the calls on the ice then eh?

The problem is that the parade to the penalty box would be every shift.

Sports has a human element to it which makes it imperfect yet people want to complain.

I'm not expecting perfection, but lets follow the rules no? When its obviously 2 ft behind the line call the icing.. currently its 50/50 depending on how the linesman feels.

When the player is at the hashmarks, blow it dead. Don't blow it dead at the top of the circle because you want to.

There is a difference between reviewing every call down to the millimeter and not following the rules like they currently do. Tighten up the calls and follow the rules, but we don't need to review every play.. just find the middle ground.

 

[SEALBound]

Because the icing doesn't usually result in a goal. That's what the offsides is challenging.

 

[I am Bettman]

The assumption is that the puck leaves contact with the stick at the very end of the shooting motion, so it is really based on where the end of the players stick ends up when they are shooting it in.

 

[I Hate Blake Coleman]

Video review would give every player on the ice a breather. Great idea.

 

[SomeDude]

Because the icing doesn't usually result in a goal. That's what the offsides is challenging.

1 cm of a skate blade over the line also has no influence on a goal, but it doesn’t stop them from taking 9 minutes to scrutinize it.

 

[SEALBound]

1 cm of a skate blade over the line also has no influence on a goal, but it doesn’t stop them from taking 9 minutes to scrutinize it.

It's not the skate length over the line, it's the non-whistle that would have stopped the play, that's what matters. It's kinda like - it doesn't matter how far you drive a stolen car. 1in vs 1000 miles makes no difference. It's theft.

If a team is 1cm behind the red line and the refs call no icing and it leads to a goal for, then there would be a good argument to review it. I would support that. With well defined rules like off-sides, icing, high-sticking, etc, there should absolutely be a review process if a goal is scored based off a missed play by the referees. It's rare enough that the time taken is of no consequence. The use of reviews isn't taking a 2.5hr game to a 3.5hr game every single night. There's plenty of things that can kill flows.

 

[SomeDude]

It's not the skate length over the line, it's the non-whistle that would have stopped the play, that's what matters. It's kinda like - it doesn't matter how far you drive a stolen car. 1in vs 1000 miles makes no difference. It's theft.

If a team is 1cm behind the red line and the refs call no icing and it leads to a goal for, then there would be a good argument to review it. I would support that. With well defined rules like off-sides, icing, high-sticking, etc, there should absolutely be a review process if a goal is scored based off a missed play by the referees. It's rare enough that the time taken is of no consequence. The use of reviews isn't taking a 2.5hr game to a 3.5hr game every single night. There's plenty of things that can kill flows.

Nah. If you can’t tell in 30 seconds of replay, it didn’t affect the play and who cares.

 

[dire wolf]

I've been making this point for a while now -- not because I want more icings but to point out how dumb the offside calls have become. Nobody gets upset about the loosey-goosey icing calls, but they throw a fit if a blade is 2 mm offside. By the way, it's not just the leeway at the red line, it's also the judgment calls on the race to the puck judged at the dots. It's completely inexact -- and I'm fine with that. Get rid of offside review. I would argue the icing non-calls provide a bigger advantage than the micro-offside calls.

 

[HarrySPlinkett]

Because there is value to keeping the flow of the game and keeping whistles down.

And the reason this same logic isn’t applied to offsides is…?

 

[Crease]

I've been making this point for a while now -- not because I want more icings but to point out how dumb the offside calls have become. Nobody gets upset about the loosey-goosey icing calls, but they throw a fit if a blade is 2 mm offside. By the way, it's not just the leeway at the red line, it's also the judgment calls on the race to the puck judged at the dots. It's completely inexact -- and I'm fine with that. Get rid of offside review. I would argue the icing non-calls provide a bigger advantage than the micro-offside calls.

This was really my point too. I don’t want icing review. I just find the league’s treatment of icing and offside internally inconsistent. I get it—20 years ago the red line seemed miles away from the net and danger. But that’s no longer the case. I would actually prefer if the league eases off offside review.

 

[BB79]

Simple solution is to have AI make all the calls on the ice then eh?

Just say NO to A.I. at every turn

 

[TMLife17]

Game flow and pedantry

No need to scrutizine inches or even a foot on a dump in from halfrink. If it's close enough they give you the benefit. Inches on a zone entry with possession obviously matter a lot more.

The bigger thing with icing that pisses me off is when the chasing team lollygags back for it and stops skating while pretending to. More icings should be negated if you aren't truly skating for the puck imo.

They don't need to skate back hard for it if there is no pressure on them. Why would they go flying toward the end boards, that's not how you would retrieve a puck with no pressure. He should honestly be able to lallygag that as hard as he wants if the attacker isn't forcing the issue.

 

[Henry Miller]

I’ve always felt icing should be a more discretionary call. A guy misses a stretch pass, or a guy harassed by tight defense before he reaches the redline? Icing. A guy about to go off the ice on a change flips the puck when he’s 2 feet behind the redline and no defenders around him? No icing

 

[Tofveve]

Great minds think alike lol. I made this thread the other day in the SCP forum. Unfortunately I haven't had time to follow up at all.

An Officiating Double-Standard in Offsides Precision and Icing Precision

This has been going on for as long as I've watched the game (late 1970s) and I don't know why. Offsides are precisely called with league reviews being the norm (goals being called back regularly). Meanwhile defensemen frequently shoot the puck into the offensive zone (rounding the end boards)...

forums.hfboards.com

 

[Filthy Dangles]

They don't need to skate back hard for it if there is no pressure on them. Why would they go flying toward the end boards, that's not how you would retrieve a puck with no pressure. He should honestly be able to lallygag that as hard as he wants if the attacker isn't forcing the issue.

Im not saying bust their ass back, i mean if they can get the puck with reasonable effort, a lot of times they jsut stop skating and get the call.

 

[SEALBound]

Nah. If you can’t tell in 30 seconds of replay, it didn’t affect the play and who cares.

The time it ultimately takes is irrelevant. If you are taking then time to do it, you do it. What's the difference between 30sec and 3 min?

 

[Canadienna]

And the reason this same logic isn’t applied to offsides is…?

I don't know, but it feels like just a traditional thing. Even before offside review, they were always more cautious about offsides.

Maybe they feel offsides are more influential or more likely to lead to a goal than not making center ice on a dump in.

 

[HarrySPlinkett]

The time it ultimately takes is irrelevant. If you are taking then time to do it, you do it. What's the difference between 30sec and 3 min?

Two minutes and thirty seconds of boredom spent wondering who the f*** can possibly be this bothered about an offside.

 

[Ezekial]

Guy dumps the puck in from two feet behind the red line. No ice. Close enough. Not even controversial.

Given how fast the game is now, could you argue that a missed icing call is as material as a missed offside call?

The puck releases off the stick past the line but the players body and hands are behind it.

 

[KingsFan7824]

Because the icing doesn't usually result in a goal. That's what the offsides is challenging.

But only if it results in a goal within that shift. We can get absurd as say that a missed offsides call from 3 minutes before, eventually resulted in a goal which may not have happened had the offsides play been called correctly. Same as an icing. If it gets called right or wrong, then that doesn't happen, which means the next shift is different, and then the next shift is different, and the goal isn't scored. But then that can be applied to any made or missed call.

The better question is why does a team that takes a penalty have an advantage that they wouldn't have if they didn't take the penalty? Why does the SH team get to freely ice the puck?

 

[RandV]

Great minds think alike lol. I made this thread the other day in the SCP forum. Unfortunately I haven't had time to follow up at all.

An Officiating Double-Standard in Offsides Precision and Icing Precision

This has been going on for as long as I've watched the game (late 1970s) and I don't know why. Offsides are precisely called with league reviews being the norm (goals being called back regularly). Meanwhile defensemen frequently shoot the puck into the offensive zone (rounding the end boards)...

forums.hfboards.com

Thanks for putting a good sense of for how long this has been normal in North American hockey (not sure about Europe). Even beer league is called this way.

Just my own speculation here that came to mind because of this topic, but think for a second how often do you see a linesman get the offside call wrong? It's not something you notice but if you watch the game there's pretty much always a linesman already on one of the lines when its being crossed, and they can make those precision calls because they're always in position. It's not a great distance from the red line to the blue line, but at the speed of the game I don't think the linesmen can cover both lines with near exact precision.

So unless you want to throw a 3rd linesman into the game, I would bet that this has something to do with how the loose calling on near red line dump ins started.

 

[Sykur]

Guy dumps the puck in from two feet behind the red line. No ice. Close enough. Not even controversial.

Given how fast the game is now, could you argue that a missed icing call is as material as a missed offside call?

Because icing is situational, offsides is not. The officials play the advantage -- they have the sole discretion to wave it off if it has no direct impact on the current play.

Icing doesn't occur in a vacuum. It's not just about the icing itself, it's also about the position of the players when the icing is executed. Linesmen are more inclined to let icing go if there is no forecheck or pressure. The team is icing to give up possession (usually to have a line change).

From the perspective of the defending team, if you give them the option to take possession in their own zone or take a faceoff in the offensive zone, they'd likely choose the possession every time (since the faceoff is a 50/50 gamble at possession). So the linesman is essentially making that decision for them. Don't blow the whistle if the d-man is not being pressured, they want to have the puck.

If, on the other hand, icing is executed as an attacking strategy ie: to gain territory, dump and chase, sending in forecheckers to retrieve the puck behind the goal, then icing is called far more tightly, as tight as offsides. They're using it to gain a distinct advantage so the puck better be over the redline when executing that strat.

So the next time you see a dump-in from behind the red line, look where the players are and what they are doing at that moment. The linesman usually has a good reason for letting the icing go, and that reason rarely has anything to do with the icing itself.

 

[Javaman]

I'm not at all bothered by the very liberal application of the icing rule. I'm in favour applying the same standard to the offside rule. If there's an offside challenge to a goal, the officials should only be to watch the replay at full speed. If there's no clear and obvious error, the goal should stand.

It's always boggled my mind that the NHL laments the lack of goals, but simultaneously enforces rules that take away goals for the weakest of reasons.