Silly Question -- But Why Can't Refs' Calls and Non-calls be Challenged?
- Thread starter KingWantsCup
- Start date
A Loyal Dog
I love SlafCaulZuki (pronounced Slafkovsky). Woof!
- Oct 20, 2016
- 9,606
- 11,578
Industry 4.0 will take care of that. Robotic referees will call every perfect call in the next 10 years or so, lol. This way, no fan from either side can dispute it! And no more challenges. This in all sports.
"Refs you suck! Refs you suck!"
More job losses to machines!
I like the quote. Usually, we just resort to booing so loudly that the PA can't be heard.
Burke the Legend
Registered User
- Feb 22, 2012
- 8,317
- 2,850
JonathanK
McOptimistic
I think a coach should be allowed to challenge high-sticking and delay of game for shooting the puck out of play. Both are completely objective calls that would probably take less time than the average offside review. I know it would lead to more delay, but if the league wants to implement review, at least implement it uniformly.
I agree that review for subjective calls would be a terrible idea.
I agree that review for subjective calls would be a terrible idea.
The refs don't all suck. Just about 1/3 to 1/2 IMHO.
Here is an idea. If you break your stick on somebody, or you break their stick, it is a penalty for something every time. You would be surprised on how many times I have seen this during this season without a penalty being called.
I think that some refs are "challenged" in the AHL. They take that with them to the NHL. As a lady yelled at a recent Admirals game, "why have 2 refs if neither can see?"
This.
A referee acquaintance told me after I was teasing him about some calls be had made. "You put on the stripes, and I'll be happy to critique your performance." They have an impossible job; people tend to forget that.
I don't want any coaches' challenges, let alone more. They ruin the flow of the game.
Will never be able to review non-calls. The only penalty I could see being possibly reviewed/reversed is high sticking. The others are pretty much judgement calls.
Also just want to point out that the refs have been ridiculously inconsistent so far these playoffs. I know it's a really tough job but just seems like their randomly picking who goes to the box and sometimes at the worst possible times in close games. it's been worse than usual.
Also just want to point out that the refs have been ridiculously inconsistent so far these playoffs. I know it's a really tough job but just seems like their randomly picking who goes to the box and sometimes at the worst possible times in close games. it's been worse than usual.
ottawa
Avatar of the Year*
On top of all the fkaws ready mentioned, I could see coaches challenging calls when they're out of timeouts to buy time.
alphahelix
Registered User
- Feb 15, 2007
- 7,103
- 2,899
Just make it so the 1 coaches challenge they have applies to more things. In fact, make it so it doesn't apply to offsides - or only FLAGRANt offsides, give guys like 1 step + 2 second leeway so if you don't violate it by more than that it can't be reviewed...
will probably decrease review time if they are spending their 1 review on something less ticky tacky
will probably decrease review time if they are spending their 1 review on something less ticky tacky
St8Sh00ter
Registered User
- Oct 16, 2016
- 524
- 0
KingWantsCup
#FightLikeHell
Perhaps instead of challenging non-calls, why not allow challenges against penalties against one's team? I can understand how non-calls would slow the game down, but this gives coaches a chance to do more than just bark at refs. This also would dramatically reduce embellishment, as it would result in those penalties being called after further review. That would at least present the opportunity for justice against diving and embellishment, and effectively reverse the power play in such situations.
