Time to get rid of the offside review?

[dkhockey]

It´s overused now, and the team only loses a timeout, if they really have to keep that stupid review rule, at least give a 2 minute penalty to the team that wants a review.

Each time a goal is scored now, we see the opposing coach looking down on a monitor. I thought it was enough that everyone in attendance have their noses glued to their phone screens.

Click to read more...

 

[Uberdachen]

Is extra time given after every goal for coaches to look down at those monitors? I don't really care whether they look at a screen or the players slowly making their way to the circles or their phone to check on their crockpot app.

 

[the4thlinegrinder]

Absolutely. Calling goals back for a skate being an inch off the ice is brutal, especially in a league starved for offense. Also, despite what some people like to say, the offside review is NOT about "getting the call right". If that were the case then they should review EVERY single instance of potential offside. Play lead to a penalty? Check for offside. Play lead to an offensive zone face off? Check for offside. Play went the opposite way and the other team scored? Check if it was originally offside. I mean, you want to the the call right, right?!

 

[Uberdachen]

Absolutely. Calling goals back for a skate being an inch off the ice is brutal, especially in a league starved for offense. Also, despite what some people like to say, the offside review is NOT about "getting the call right". If that were the case then they should review EVERY single instance of potential offside. Play lead to a penalty? Check for offside. Play lead to an offensive zone face off? Check for offside. Play went the opposite way and the other team scored? Check if it was originally offside. I mean, you want to the the call right, right?!

Points are awarded to teams based on who had the most offensive zone faceoffs, so this is fine with me.

 

[Claypool]

I can't get excited for any goal until the puck is dropped at center ice because I assume it'll just go to review every time.

 

[Seanaconda]

Absolutely. Calling goals back for a skate being an inch off the ice is brutal, especially in a league starved for offense. Also, despite what some people like to say, the offside review is NOT about "getting the call right". If that were the case then they should review EVERY single instance of potential offside. Play lead to a penalty? Check for offside. Play lead to an offensive zone face off? Check for offside. Play went the opposite way and the other team scored? Check if it was originally offside. I mean, you want to the the call right, right?!

Nah just put a timer on the rule if the offside wasn't a factor in the play that led to the goal it shouldn't matter.

But if a ref misses a blatant 3 foot offside that leads to a breakaway goal that should absolutely be reviewable

 

[PlamsUnlimited]

Rule just needs to be tightened up when challenging.

Quite honestly now it is almost similar to using the timeout anyway. Guys are kinda stopped, if the challenge review takes a while it gives the guys time to rest and draw up a new scheme plan or formation, etc.SO just tighten it up, maybe look for better more efficient ways to complete the review.

 

[Saidin]

Just have it if you are wrong on the challenge, you get a delay of game penalty.

 

[the4thlinegrinder]

Points are awarded to teams based on who had the most offensive zone faceoffs, so this is fine with me.

Hey, if people want to get it right then they should get them all right.

 

[Seanaconda]

Rule just needs to be tightened up when challenging.

Quite honestly now it is almost similar to using the timeout anyway. Guys are kinda stopped, if the challenge review takes a while it gives the guys time to rest and draw up a new scheme plan or formation, etc.SO just tighten it up, maybe look for better more efficient ways to complete the review.

If it's that close that it takes forever to review it it was probably a justified review. Chips wouldn't help because it's foot on ice not plane.

Or debatable if the guy has control of the puck

 

[SladeWilson23]

Absolutely.

 

[oilersfan87]

This offside rule really needs to go but it looks like it's not going to happen. The NHL has been doing a really poor job at making their product more entertaining the past few years, and not knowing if a goal is going to count basically every time one is scored is not helping at all.

There is nothing worse than watching your team score a nice goal only for it to be waved off 5 minutes later because it was an inch offside. When a goal is disallowed in that case, I don't even feel like watching the rest of the game because it usually ends up ruining the game.

 

[Goose312]

Nah. Prevents the guy 10 feet offsides who scored from counting.

 

[PlamsUnlimited]

If it's that close that it takes forever to review it it was probably a justified review. Chips wouldn't help because it's foot on ice not plane.

Or debatable if the guy has control of the puck

Didn't say or advocate chips or anything of the like. Talking better ways to move it along when it gets ridiculous is all

 

[Jepprey]

Nah. Prevents the guy 10 feet offsides who scored from counting.

10 foot offside goals happens once a year. They call back a 1 inch offside goal 5 times a week.

 

[PsychoPanther]

10 foot offside goals happens once a year. They call back a 1 inch offside goal 5 times a week.

Yep. This one still gives me nightmares. Especially because the great goal was scored 10(!) seconds later. 2 min delay of game penalty would be fair for false challenge.

 

[Ovechkins Wodka]

Rule is terrible and makes the refs look bad

 

[Seanaconda]

Didn't say or advocate chips or anything of the like. Talking better ways to move it along when it gets ridiculous is all

Yeah sorry i was kinda combining previous posts .

I just think to add a time limit. If the offside wasn't part of the play it is kinda silly. Otherwise you have to change the rule to make it easier /faster somehow

The only thing I can see is changing it to plane vs on the ice but with optical illusions it would probably be worse.

 

[Goose312]

10 foot offside goals happens once a year. They call back a 1 inch offside goal 5 times a week.

So they correct 5 wrong goals a week? Sounds good to me.

 

[Paperbagofglory]

The NHL needed a reason to control the score of more of their games. Can't have a team be up 3-0 in the second, lets call it back when it does not even look conclusive.

 

[PlamsUnlimited]

I don't understand why we don't get to see the blue line cameras that everyone talks about. Or maybe there is footage but I just am not looking hard enough

 

[TaLoN]

Nope, getting more calls right with this rule. Keep it.

 

[Seanaconda]

I don't understand why we don't get to see the blue line cameras that everyone talks about. Or maybe there is footage but I just am not looking hard enough

The tv stations have to get it sent to them after the review by Toronto(or the nhl head office whatever you wanna call it)

I've seen some. It gets blocked by players and has a dead spot close to the boards where most offsides happen

 

[dechire]

I don't understand why we don't get to see the blue line cameras that everyone talks about. Or maybe there is footage but I just am not looking hard enough

I've seen the footage a few times. It's really ugly. The lighting is terrible and they usually only show anything if it's happening right in front of the camera(but not too close or too far or you'll see nothing). Keep in mind that it's impossible for a camera to have focus on an entire field from 1-40 feet in front of it. It a nice idea but those cameras are probably very rarely the main angles used for a determination. They are nothing like the tv cameras.

 

[DPHawk]

So they correct 5 wrong goals a week? Sounds good to me.

So is it about getting every call right or is about egregious calls right (like you original post suggested). If it's about every call then why shouldn't penalties or icing that lead to goals be reviewable? Some penalties (delay of game, TMM, or high-sticking) are "zero-discretion" so why should offsides be reviewable but no those penalties or icing?