Explain this call (penalty during a called back off-side)

[ucanthanzalthetruth]

In today's Panthers-Sabres game, Eichel scored but Buffalo was way offside and the goal was overturned. But after the zone entry but before the goal was scored, Yandle took a penalty and after the successful challenge still had to serve the penalty. If the play was offside why did the penalty still count?

Click to read more...

 

[Empoleon8771]

If the play was offside why did the penalty still count?

Probably because there isn't a rule specifically saying that he wouldn't have to serve the penalty. I imagine that will be a rule change going forward.

 

[Ezekial]

I can't.

 

[Mattavarner]

Because it would lead to players taking liberties if they knew the play was offside and they couldn't be penalized.
If someone sucker punches a player after the whistle, is it not a penalty because the play was blown dead?

 

[CycloneSweep]

Just because a goal was overturned doesn't mean the penalty didn't happen. You can take a penalty between whistles,this is no different.

 

[HTFN]

I think the general idea is that just because a player saw something that means they think/know the goal won't count, they can't then commit any penalties that they know would be washed out in the end.

If I'm not mistaken there's something to that effect for, say, if a goal is scored but not called on the ice, and the scoring team commits a penalty in between that time and the review, they can have the goal awarded and go shorthanded all at once.

 

[Panthaz89]

lucky it was ruled offsides considering Eichel had control and kicked it across himself.

 

[Syckle78]

There's no dead time in which infractions are allowed.

 

[Seanaconda]

What kind of penalty was it ? I can't see why the penalty would be overturned , the player still did whatever illegal thing happened.

Not like you can trip or crosscheck a guy between whistles. If it was a too many men or something that would be dumb tho

 

[Windy River]

What kind of penalty was it ? I can't see why the penalty would be overturned , the player still did whatever illegal thing happened.

Not like you can trip or crosscheck a guy between whistles. If it was a too many men or something that would be dumb tho

I like the scenario you proposed

 

[Windy River]

Yet another reason to take away the ‘zombie’ time which plays after a close-call suspected offside. Should be an in-the-moment call, just like every other call in the game other than a goal.

 

[Paris in Flames]

Same thing happens if the puck goes in and nobody realizes it and play continues. Any penalty that happens during that continued play but before the goal is officially called counts.

It's weird but it makes sense. You can't just absolve a big slash or whatever just because that time of the game technically never happened.

 

[Snippit]

This is why it's ridiculous that you can challenge off-sides in the first place. The idea of "dead time" is just stupid.

It's also silly that the goal could have been scored well after the zone entry but then gets called off.

 

[SladeWilson23]

A penalty during dead time is still a penalty. It's there to prevent players from taking liberties on other players.

 

[KinCornKarn]

There is more controversy over the offside challenge than there was over the couple of goals that were scored while a player was offside. (before the challenge rule)

 

[Dietpepsi]

A penalty during dead time is still a penalty. It's there to prevent players from taking liberties on other players.

But Officer, when I killed that player with my hockey stick, the play was offside and so that murder didn't really happen

 

[Sticksandsun]

But Officer, when I killed that player with my hockey stick, the play was offside and so that murder didn't really happen

It was a hook

 

[Beezeral]

lucky it was ruled offsides considering Eichel had control and kicked it across himself.

Uhhh nah. No chance that was possession.

 

[Alwalys]

Probably because there isn't a rule specifically saying that he wouldn't have to serve the penalty. I imagine that will be a rule change going forward.

nope, it has happened to the Sharks before. the penalty still counts, as if that makes ANY sense. i could see physical type penalties or stick infractions, but ones that result from the dead play such as restraining fouls or DOGPOG don't make sense.

 

[Alwalys]

There's no dead time in which infractions are allowed.

after a play is blown dead several things that are penalties during play are not penalties

 

[Gentle Man]

It was slashing. Unless i'm wrong, it was a stick slash.

But here is the thing also, the clock had to be rewound about 15 to 20 seconds because of the laps.

So technically the penalty occurred after the power play began .

 

[Anglesmith]

It wasn't during dead play. You can think of it as a delayed offside.

 

[Dr Black]

There is more controversy over the offside challenge than there was over the couple of goals that were scored while a player was offside. (before the challenge rule)

EXACTLY!! I have been watching NHL hockey for close to 4o years. NOT ONCE do I remember watching a game, and having a goal being scored that the replay showed was offside, not once!! The infamous Duchane goal was a very rare anomaly. By putting in the offside review, the NHL fixed something that wasn't broken!!

 

[Dache]

In today's Panthers-Sabres game, Eichel scored but Buffalo was way offside and the goal was overturned. But after the zone entry but before the goal was scored, Yandle took a penalty and after the successful challenge still had to serve the penalty. If the play was offside why did the penalty still count?

I know this is an extreme example, but what if in the same scenario someone 2 hand slashes another player in the head, gets 10 and a game. Should that be ignored too just cause there was an offside?

 

[SotasicA]

This has been a rule forever. Even back before offside challenges. Sometimes the puck would enter the net, and they'd only find out later. And meanwhile someone slashed another played.

Penalties always counted.