WordsOfWisdom Posted December 1, 2015 Share Posted December 1, 2015 Well, much like some fans have had their fill of the shootout, or 3-on-3 overtime, or the Gary points system, I've had my fill of video review -- already. It feels like every goal is being reviewed these days (for one reason or another). You can't celebrate a goal anymore, you have to celebrate video review outcomes instead. The NHL has gone down the slippery slope, and they'll never go back. It'll only get worse from here. Maybe it's just an issue I have, but I don't want to hear the referees speak. I liked them much better when they skated past the penalty box official and gave a hand signal to indicate the penalty. I don't want them on a mic. I don't want them addressing the crowd. I want them invisible. I don't want to wait for the outcome of a video review. This isn't the NFL, and I wish the NHL would stop being a copycat league. Just let the official on the ice make the call. We have two of them now. Why even have officials on the ice at all? They might as well call the game from the video review booth. (Opps! That's the future I'm sure.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flyerrod Posted December 1, 2015 Share Posted December 1, 2015 Just let the official on the ice make the call. We have two of them now. Why even have officials on the ice at all?With the way several of them call the game, that is a good question. I have to say that I don't think every goal needs to be reviewed but, and this is a big but, IF the coach uses a challenge to correct a missed offsides or bad goal due to a high stick or goalie interference, I am good with it. They are allowed one per game at the cost of their timeout if they are wrong. This should not be adding that much time to the games. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WordsOfWisdom Posted December 1, 2015 Author Share Posted December 1, 2015 With the way several of them call the game, that is a good question. I have to say that I don't think every goal needs to be reviewed but, and this is a big but, IF the coach uses a challenge to correct a missed offsides or bad goal due to a high stick or goalie interference, I am good with it. They are allowed one per game at the cost of their timeout if they are wrong. This should not be adding that much time to the games. But as we're seeing, even the video review people can blow calls. The proponents of video review are "perfectionists". They want to "get it right". Clearly, perfection is unattainable. We just move the mistake from the referee to the video review official. Part of the problem is that because scoring is way down, most of the goals being scored today are not "clean" goals. Every goal is a dirty tip-in, deflection, screen, questionable bounce, etc. They almost always get reviewed because they involve some level of controversy. Even the pucks that go in clean will bounce out of the net so quickly that nobody knows it's a goal. The net doesn't "absorb" the puck and trap it inside, it acts like a rubber wall and bounces it right back out. There are so many simple changes that could be made to cut down on these reviews (or eliminate them entirely) but I think the NHL is doing this for reasons of ad revenue and cable TV revenue. They want to quietly prolong the game and up-sell fans on special game packages where you watch the game from a million different camera angles. I think it's purely a business/marketing thing. Anyway, don't mind my griping. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flyerrod Posted December 1, 2015 Share Posted December 1, 2015 @WordsOfWisdom This is a fine place to gripe so gripe away. I was under the impression that not every goal gets reviewed and that you had to challenge for the review resulting in the loss of your TO if you are wrong. That can be a costly move if you lose the challenge leaving you unable to stop the play after an icing when you have a tired team on the ice. Too many times I have seen poor officiating decide games with poor calls. They really need to keep track of which officials consistantly get calls wrong and remove them from the games too.With only one challenge available unless you are correct in the challenge, the game should move quickly along. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MadDevil Posted December 1, 2015 Share Posted December 1, 2015 I really haven't noticed much difference to be honest. The only thing that kind of bothers me with it is refs reviewing their own calls, especially goalie interference. One refs interference might be a good goal from another ref. I would rather have one single source making that decision. Although I guess to do that you need one person that has to be in the war room every night to maintain consistency. Video review isn't taking any enjoyment out of the games for me.But then I'm not an old duffer crying about how hockey was "back in my day"... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BluPuk Posted December 1, 2015 Share Posted December 1, 2015 I agree WOW, to a degree. I just think it's important to get the call right as to whether it's a goal or not. I think what you describe is being caused by the Goalie Interference, High Stick or not, Offside or not type reviews. I say, leave those calls to the referees. Review goals for whether or not they went in for real and leave the Kicking Motion or not calls to the guys on the ice. By all means, review every goal, but do it while the game goes on. If the refs make a bad call (which is bound to happen), the league can let them know it. Sometimes, reviews can save your arse though.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WordsOfWisdom Posted December 1, 2015 Author Share Posted December 1, 2015 I agree WOW, to a degree. I just think it's important to get the call right as to whether it's a goal or not. I think what you describe is being caused by the Goalie Interference, High Stick or not, Offside or not type reviews. I say, leave those calls to the referees. Review goals for whether or not they went in for real and leave the Kicking Motion or not calls to the guys on the ice. By all means, review every goal, but do it while the game goes on. If the refs make a bad call (which is bound to happen), the league can let them know it. Sometimes, reviews can save your arse though.... I'm more concerned about my family doctor getting it right. Hockey is still a game. The players are human. The refs are human. There will always be some mistakes made, but it isn't the end of the world. I've already seen a handful of video reviews where they still got it wrong. Any scheme to correct human error is subject to human error. Changes I'd make to the game to remove the desire for video review:Change the nets so that they absorb the puck and don't let it bounce back out.Have four dedicated linesmen (located in fixed positions off-ice) that watch only for offsides. (Two per blueline on opposite sides of the ice.)Allow pucks to be kicked into the net. (Who cares really? That takes more skill than using your stick.)Let the refs make the call on the ice.Add a THIRD referee. (By removing the linesmen and locating them off-ice, you allow room for a third ref while reducing bodies from four down to three.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Podein25 Posted December 1, 2015 Share Posted December 1, 2015 The refs are human Reported. There is no evidence for this. They are much worse than humans. Like dead humans. Explains their humorlessness. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WordsOfWisdom Posted December 2, 2015 Author Share Posted December 2, 2015 Reported. There is no evidence for this. They are much worse than humans. Like dead humans. Explains their humorlessness. LOL. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WordsOfWisdom Posted December 6, 2015 Author Share Posted December 6, 2015 So apparently it took 9 minutes to do a recent review for a coach's challenge. (I didn't see the game.) Am I the only person that thinks this is ridiculous? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hf101 Posted December 6, 2015 Share Posted December 6, 2015 Apparently at the next Board of Govenors meeting next week they will discuss the use of placing the NHL's own cameras to minimise the time it takes to get the TV replays from the various venues. I guess it took about 9 minutes during the Capitals - Jets game to determinine if the call on the ice should stand. Which it did as there wasn't conclusive evidence to overturn the game winning goal by the Jets. These NHL cameras will be tested out in the New York City.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ScottM Posted December 6, 2015 Share Posted December 6, 2015 Apparently at the next Board of Govenors meeting next week they will discuss the use of placing the NHL's own cameras to minimise the time it takes to get the TV replays from the various venues. I guess it took about 9 minutes during the Capitals - Jets game to determinine if the call on the ice should stand. Which it did as there wasn't conclusive evidence to overturn the game winning goal by the Jets. These NHL cameras will be tested out in the New York City.. I like that idea. I'm all for getting it right, but nine minutes is beyond ridiculous. If the NHL has their own video, they can immediately put it to work, and they can put in a maximum amount of time for a review. If they can't decide before that time runs out, it should be called inconclusive, and the original call should stand. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WordsOfWisdom Posted December 7, 2015 Author Share Posted December 7, 2015 Apparently at the next Board of Govenors meeting next week they will discuss the use of placing the NHL's own cameras to minimise the time it takes to get the TV replays from the various venues. I guess it took about 9 minutes during the Capitals - Jets game to determinine if the call on the ice should stand. Which it did as there wasn't conclusive evidence to overturn the game winning goal by the Jets. These NHL cameras will be tested out in the New York City.. A couple of cameras at each blueline or a couple officials stationed at the blueline (but off-ice) would be just perfect. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BluPuk Posted December 7, 2015 Share Posted December 7, 2015 Even with people on the lines (4 total would be required, right?), since we're talking about fractions of an inch, and very high speeds; no one is going to call offsides 100% correct. Reviews for offsides, goalie interference and the like (high stick, kicking motions) IMHO should NOT be allowed. There are TWO referees on the ice - let them call it - period. Just use replays to determine if the puck was in or not. I don't subscribe to the bias theory and that's saying something for a Leafs fan. Just my 2 cents. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WordsOfWisdom Posted December 8, 2015 Author Share Posted December 8, 2015 Even with people on the lines (4 total would be required, right?), since we're talking about fractions of an inch, and very high speeds; no one is going to call offsides 100% correct. Reviews for offsides, goalie interference and the like (high stick, kicking motions) IMHO should NOT be allowed. There are TWO referees on the ice - let them call it - period. Just use replays to determine if the puck was in or not. I don't subscribe to the bias theory and that's saying something for a Leafs fan. Just my 2 cents. Here's an idea: Put the linesman up in the press box -- exactly at each blueline. If an offside occurs, they press a button that emits some sort of tone like a foul in tennis. Benefits:Call is made instantly, no replay required.Officials don't obstruct fans.Officials don't obstruct players.Done. How can you beat that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.