Overturned Goal... WHOA!!

[Cage]

I'm absolutely shocked that a goal can be challenged on the basis of a missed offsides call as the puck entered the zone.  That's just going back way too far.  I thought that challenges were only related to the direct scoring play; goaltender interference, kicking in the puck, players in the crease and such.  To be able to challenge all the away back to the offsides, just takes too much away from the game.  If the Sabres had come in offsides and then spent a full minute or two passing around in the Ottawa zone before scoring you can initiate a challenge wiping out the last 2 minutes??  

 

Some missed calls are just part of the circumstances of a game that is officiated by other humans and can't be corrected that far back.  This rule is just wrong and I can't understand why any rules committee would adopt it and think they're improving the game.  It wrecked the entire momentum the Sabres built up, the crowd with it, essentially on a technicality.... just wrong!

Edited October 9, 2015 by Cage

[sabresouth]

It's why I love hockey, it's fast paced and few stoppages. You can go several minutes without a whistle. To be able to go back that far for a challenge just ruines the pace of the game. Like another poster said " this isn't football or baseball". Just keep the reviews for the actual goal.

[markj]

I guess the NHL felt scoring was getting a little to high. :unsure:

[deluca67]

If you're going to use replay this is the way to use it. Review the entire play. It sucked last night but it was 100% the right call. I'd hate to lose a game on a goal that resulted from an offsides. 

Edited October 9, 2015 by DeLuca1967

[kishoph]

If Ottawa would have gone back up the ice (if Kane didn't score) and scored a goal, would the Sabres have been able to challenge their own offsides and have the Ottawa goal disallowed ? What I'm wondering is if there's no whistle for a couple of minutes and a few possession changes, how far can the challenge go back ?

[sabresouth]

There are numerous "plays" between whistles in hockey, change of possession, shots on goal, ect. In football you can't go back three plays to make a challenge. I just don't see how to make it work without it messing up the flo. I definitely think teams will challenge even though they know they will lose just to stop the momentum of the other team.

[Cage]

If you're going to use replay this is the way to use it. Review the entire play. It sucked last night but it was 100% the right call. I'd hate to lose a game on a goal that resulted from an offsides. 

 

I'll ask my question again... if the Sabres came in offsides and spent two full minutes moving/passing the puck around in the Ottawa zone and then finallly scored.  Could the offsides be challenged from 2 minutes ago??  

[Taro T]

I'll ask my question again... if the Sabres came in offsides and spent two full minutes moving/passing the puck around in the Ottawa zone and then finallly scored. Could the offsides be challenged from 2 minutes ago??

 

Yes it can.

 

Sorry, thought your Q was if it could be overturned if it didn't directly result in the goal. My post was actually answering kishop's Q. In which case the post reads: No. It has to be an offsides by the attacking team. And it has to be an offisdes directly resulting in the goal, so a missed offsides prior to the defending team clearing the zone then having the zone reentered cleanly will not result in a goal waived off.

 

Any penalties that occur when play should have been stopped will be served.

 

My beef w/ the rule is the process; if they can't tell if the call should be overturned in 2 minutes, then the call should stand. This one ended up getting called correctly but it was clearly offsides - should not have taken so long to determine. I'd also like to have the jumbotron show what the refs / linesmen / vrj / TO / whoever is looking at.

 

This went against Sabres, but it looks like it will be a good rule.

Edited October 9, 2015 by Taro T

[bob_sauve28]

Can't we review if the puck was dropped correctly on opening faceoff?

 

 

I wish I could fire someone over this monstrostity

[LGR4GM]

there should be no coaches challenge in hockey. All the NHL needed to do was make GT interference part of their general review of all scoring plays and we are done.  Offsides btw should be changed, once the puck touches the blue line you can enter the zone, not once it crosses the blue line.  The NHL should make little tweaks like that to increase offense.

[Eleven]

If you're going to use replay this is the way to use it. Review the entire play. It sucked last night but it was 100% the right call. I'd hate to lose a game on a goal that resulted from an offsides. 

 

Maybe hockey shouldn't have coach-initiated replay.

 

It definitely was the right call.

 

We all root for a team that has been screwed by an illegal goal, and I'd hate to see them lose another one one a bad goal, but missing a split-second offsides call is within reason.  It's not like this was the Islanders in 1980 or anything.

 

This is going to interfere too much with the flow of the game.

[Taro T]

there should be no coaches challenge in hockey. All the NHL needed to do was make GT interference part of their general review of all scoring plays and we are done.  Offsides btw should be changed, once the puck touches the blue line you can enter the zone, not once it crosses the blue line.  The NHL should make little tweaks like that to increase offense.

No. The reason the puck has to completely cross the blue line (in either direction) is it effectively makes the rink bigger as each zone overlaps by 1 ft. That isn't broken; no need to fix it.

[Eleven]

No. The reason the puck has to completely cross the blue line (in either direction) is it effectively makes the rink bigger as each zone overlaps by 1 ft. That isn't broken; no need to fix it.

 

If the toward-center-ice edge of each blue line were the point of reference, both for the offense entering and for the defense clearing, it would benefit offense, no?

[Taro T]

Maybe hockey shouldn't have coach-initiated replay.

 

It definitely was the right call.

 

We all root for a team that has been screwed by an illegal goal, and I'd hate to see them lose another one one a bad goal, but missing a split-second offsides call is within reason.  It's not like this was the Islanders in 1980 or anything.

 

This is going to interfere too much with the flow of the game.

Remains to be seen. It could. But hopefully they get more efficient w/ it when everybody starts to get used to actually performing the mechanics of the challenge. If they can't get quicker, it will need to go. The review that went against the Habs seemed to be quicker.

If the toward-center-ice edge of each blue line were the point of reference, both for the offense entering and for the defense clearing, it would benefit offense, no?

No, because now players entering the zone will have less room (12" worth to be exact) to receive a headman pass.

 

Unless you meant using one side of the line for the puck & the other for a skate in which case you will increase the # of blown off-sides calls if you have the back of the line the reference point for the puck but the front for an attacking player's skate.

[Eleven]

Remains to be seen. It could. But hopefully they get more efficient w/ it when everybody starts to get used to actually performing the mechanics of the challenge. If they can't get quicker, it will need to go. The review that went against the Habs seemed to be quicker.

 

No, because now players entering the zone will have less room (12" worth to be exact) to receive a headman pass.

 

Unless you meant using one side of the line for the puck & the other for a skate in which case you will increase the # of blown off-sides calls if you have the back of the line the reference point for the puck but the front for an attacking player's skate.

 

Yep, that's what I mean, and yes, there will be more blown calls.  But Liger's proposal isn't a bad one looking at it a certain way.

[LGR4GM]

Yep, that's what I mean, and yes, there will be more blown calls.  But Liger's proposal isn't a bad one looking at it a certain way.

i meant that yes.  Puck touches the Neutral zone side of the blue line and at that point the forward can fully enter the offensive zone, no need to do those whacky leg stretches to stay onsides. 

clearing the zone would stay the exact same as it currently is

[Cage]

If the toward-center-ice edge of each blue line were the point of reference, both for the offense entering and for the defense clearing, it would benefit offense, no?

 

YES,... totally agree!  The blue line (all of it) should be just like "the plane of the goal-line" in football.  The puck was on the blueline when Girgenson's was crossing.  He had fully crossed before the puck fully crossed.  If we used a "plane of the goal-line" type rule, it would have been a goal and it should have been.

Edited October 9, 2015 by Cage

[bob_sauve28]

there should be no coaches challenge in hockey. 

Totally agree. This is just stupid. Just another way to take more goal scoring out of the game. If a play is blwon off sides that isn't, they can't fix that.

[Stoner]

Remains to be seen. It could. But hopefully they get more efficient w/ it when everybody starts to get used to actually performing the mechanics of the challenge. If they can't get quicker, it will need to go. The review that went against the Habs seemed to be quicker.

The reason it took so damn long is that it was so close. I believe it was offside but no replay was all that conclusive. As with the camera angles around the goal, it was tough to tell from an angle when the puck (or the skate for that matter) crossed the line. Are they really going to rely on these angles? They can't position a camera on the lines (on the glass), or directly over the lines (ceiling level)?

 

I'll take something back after further review. The goal was scored seconds after the Sabres entered the zone, so this wasn't one of those situations where a lot of time passed. Still, the offside had as much to do with the goal as a false start would have to do with a touchdown. The NHL has enacted a bad solution to a problem that didn't exist.

Edited October 9, 2015 by pASabreFan

[Taro T]

i meant that yes.  Puck touches the Neutral zone side of the blue line and at that point the forward can fully enter the offensive zone, no need to do those whacky leg stretches to stay onsides. clearing the zone would stay the exact same as it currently is

No matter where the line is, you will still get "those whacky leg stretches" to stay onsides.

 

Yep, that's what I mean, and yes, there will be more blown calls.  But Liger's proposal isn't a bad one looking at it a certain way.

  Intentionally inducing more blown calls IS a bad proposal.

[Jsixspd]

I'm still for just ditching the bitch completely and rescinding the rule, rather than trying to "make it work".   It's face palm bad.  

[bunomatic]

This is hypothetical.  So the play carries on for a minute and a half. In that time there are 7 shots, 4 hits, 2 disregarded penalties for interference, and 1 semi-serious injury to a star player that will see him miss 2 weeks. Does all that get wiped off the board ? I know the answer just making a point. 

[bob_sauve28]

This is hypothetical.  So the play carries on for a minute and a half. In that time there are 7 shots, 4 hits, 2 disregarded penalties for interference, and 1 semi-serious injury to a star player that will see him miss 2 weeks. Does all that get wiped off the board ? I know the answer just making a point. 

If you were at the game and bought a hot dog during that time you would have to bring it back and go to end of line :)

 

 

God, I just hate stupid rules

[WannabeGM]

there should be no coaches challenge in hockey. All the NHL needed to do was make GT interference part of their general review of all scoring plays and we are done.  Offsides btw should be changed, once the puck touches the blue line you can enter the zone, not once it crosses the blue line.  The NHL should make little tweaks like that to increase offense.

Totally agree with this.

[bunomatic]

If you were at the game and bought a hot dog during that time you would have to bring it back and go to end of line :)

 

 

God, I just hate stupid rules

Ah but like the injury I've already taken a bite. ;)