GDT: ENHANCE! Your New Jersey Devils vs. the Canucks - 7PM EST
- Thread starter None Shall Pass
- Start date
tr83
Nope, still embarassed
The fact that the Devils are 5 points out is ludicrous. I hope Shero realizes that this team is not that good and is not worthy of playoff aspirations.
Better Call Sal
Salnalysis
Just want to reiterate my disdain for the offsides challenges. I cannot get over how infuriating it is for goals to be called back on something like that occurring way before the play. It shouldn't be a challengeable play, the refs should be expected to make the correct call and that's all.
Was furious about that last night.
Was furious about that last night.
The Wumpus
bottomless pit supervisor
"5 points out" is not nearly as exciting as it sounds when factoring in games in hand and 3-point games. NYI has a better chance of catching us than we do of catching Carolina.
Zippy316
aka Zippo
I liked the way the Devils used him tonight in the 3-on-3 OT.
They put him out there on a defensive zone draw and as soon as they won the puck, he went straight to the bench.
I was initially hoping the OT was longer because I wanted to see if Hynes would use Santini.
The Wumpus
bottomless pit supervisor
Seconded. They're absolutely putrid and suck the life out of the game. There are two linesmen who's job is watching the blue line. It's really an of-the-moment thing. Rewinding the game to a point where an unnoticed technicality occurred might be technically correct, but it's awful for the fans' experience.
Zippy316
aka Zippo
It really depends on your view of offsides.
Some people see it as a black and white issue like if a receiver keeps his feet in bounds or if a basketball player releases the ball from his hands before the time runs out.
Others seem to see it in a different light. Personally, for me, I see offsides as more of a formality rather than a clear black and white issue. If a player attempts to stay onside and looks onside to the naked eye, then to me that is good enough. Hockey is too fluid and fast-paced of a game to be looking at something like offsides on a split-second level.
Goaltender interference, I'm fully in favor of, because it allows referees to see subtle plays in front of the goal that cannot be seen. Those make huge differences in what is and isn't a goal. In most cases, the part of the game they are reviewing to be offsides has very little impact on the actual goal that is being scored. Does Hall's skate being a millimeter over the blue line before the puck really change anything in that play?
SteveCangialosi123
Registered User
I can't believe how close to the playoffs we are still...A great draft pick would obviously help the health of the franchise, but I want Hall to get a taste of the playoffs.
Zippy316
aka Zippo
If the Devils make the playoffs, it will be on the backs of young guys like Merrill, Santini, Zacha, Bennett, Coleman, Wood, etc. contributing to round out the team.
If they can do that, then a high pick becomes less necessarily long-term.
Seriously. I'm really hoping the staff doesn't bounce him out for Fiddler. He deserves to stay and get some more playing time.
Sadly, he's probably our best player at winning puck battles.
Burner Account
Registered User
- Feb 14, 2008
- 37,418
- 1,744
A chance to finish the hardest road trip in the league with 7 points. Even if they lose tomorrow that's a major success.
Fiddler has to play leading up to the trade deadline IMO.
Fiddler has to play leading up to the trade deadline IMO.
They have not. The 1-2-2 is a system and we all know from reading here that Hynes is incapable of getting a team to play a system.
Devil X
Call me Nostradamus
I almost feel like there should be a time limit for how long you can review a offsides in the past. What if a team gets into the zone and holds if for a long time say a minute or 2 and scores, can you then review that offside from 2 minutes ago and it can negate the goal? That seems silly to me.
I think delay of game should be a reviewable penalty, like goalie interference.
I am all for getting high draft pick but never it the playoffs are within sniffing distance. That is not what its about... if the devils continue the solid play of past few games and reel off a 5-7 game win streak and realistically get back into this thing you go for it..
perhaps your point is stay the course, meaning dont be foolish and add a veteran at the deadline etc. in which i would agree with you.. I would also be willing to trade certain players at deadline like a cammaleri if the price was right even if they were near a playoff spot.
i wouldn't sell a guy like cammaleri for a 2nd round pick if they were near playoffs though.
i agree and truthfully it really has no impact on the play. the spirit of the individual play is not altered because a guy was a millisecond offside... i get replaying goals that has legit impact... but offsides challenge to me is just slowing the game down... it has no bearing on the actual play... very stupid rule and bad for the game...
if they want to increase scoring in this league by 15% they can make one simple rule change... do not let goalies play the puck behind the net in any way..
100% right ..... and well said especially with the reference to the fluidity of the game... we do not want to turn into football with the replays... i find the NFL to completely unwatchable in part due to the non stop reviewing of plays its excruciating to watch an NFL game.
Outside of that stupid offside review, how terrible has the officiating been this year? In every game, Devils or not, these refs gotta be averaging a 50% correct rate with their calls/missed calls. In this game there was a blatant high-stick completely missed that led to the short-handed breakaway on the Devils only pp. No call, no mention from our new garbage beat writers. Also loved the made-up embellishment call on Stollery at about 2 min left. Those were the obvious ones, but almost every call in this game was questionable.
Burner Account
Registered User
- Feb 14, 2008
- 37,418
- 1,744
It would be easy enough to cap the review at say a minute or 30 or 15 seconds before the challenged goal is scored.
That would still let you review the bad call on an odd man rush but eliminate the late review of a puck that's been cycling in the zone for a full minute or more after the entrance. In which scenario you can't really say that the non-call of off sides directly caused the goal. Because a lot of other stuff has happened in the mean time.
Zajacs Bowl Cut
Lets Go Baby
I think a simple change would be that the offsides line extends up to infinity, kind of like the plane in the NFL. You shouldn't have to have your skate on the ice in order to be onsides.
BTW, can anyone say where Hall beat the goalie on that game winner? Short side, five hole, far side, between the body and the arm . . . ? I couldn't figure it out on the two or three replay angles I saw.
Monsieur Verdoux
Registered User
Statistics shows that Zajac, Cammalleri, third line and third d-pair had again strong possession numbers. Third line had more zone stars, but they still played good game.
Henrique's, Lovejoy's and Merrill's numbers are quite weak, but that first d-pair played also most of the tough minutes.
http://hockeystats.ca/game/2016020654
Henrique's, Lovejoy's and Merrill's numbers are quite weak, but that first d-pair played also most of the tough minutes.
http://hockeystats.ca/game/2016020654
MachoDiablo
Registered User
That's a good way of putting it; I'm all for "getting the call right", but things like the overturned call last night are just murder on the pace of play, and as others have said it's a ridiculous thing to go back and review given the fast paced nature of the game. If players are making the attempt to be on-side and aren't clearly abusing things, that really should be enough, and if coach's want to challenge it then maybe it should only be if a goal scores within five seconds of the offsides, something along those lines.
To me, it's like where replay hasn't worked in Major League Baseball. Not all replay in MLB has been a bad thing, but the worst area for it is on a slide play, specifically into a raised base like second or third. A guy goes to steal and slides foot-first, clearly beats the throw, but then on replay they call him out because as he hit the base his foot invariably had to come off the ground a bit, so they say the tag counts and he's out. I get that if we're being total letter-of-the-law on these things then that counts for an out, but, really? We're stopping the game, and halting the excitement of a close sliding/tag play, because for less than half a second a guy's foot couldn't stay on an elevated base? Just feels like an abuse of the intent behind the system.
