Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
DON

2019 NHL Playoffs

Recommended Posts

Good news is, starting game 1 next season,  passes with the hands will probably be reviewable.  :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, JoeLassister said:

Good news is, starting game 1 next season,  passes with the hands will probably be reviewable.  :D

 

This is good news?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Trizzak said:

 

This is good news?

 

I assume he was joking...

 

Personally, I hate video reviews in general (including coach's challenges and all that other crap) because they slow down a game already handicapped by TV time-outs, and drain all the excitement and momentum out of a goal. They're wet blankets from an entertainment point of view. I'd prefer that we just accept that hockey has an element of chaos, that mistakes happen, and live with it. We need fewer reviews, not more of 'em.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To be honest,  I'm pretty neutral about video reviews.

 

Like CC, I don't like when the play is stopped for a long period of time during a "close call" review.


On the other hand, I hate to see good goals when they shouldn't (let alone playoffs game winning goals).

 

Also,  I find it a bit stupid that  some things are reviewable while some others aren't.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Trizzak said:

 

This is good news?

Of course it is.

This was a brain dead easy reversal to make on a game changing play, why wouldn't you want to have right call and correct?

 

Same as "obvious" off-side calls, puck crossing the goal line, puck over glass, accidental high stick by own teammate etc..but when they take several minutes to hum and haw over a very close call, they should simply go with refs call and move on.

Has the length of game really changed much since reviews came in? Not noticeably that I can tell (but I record every Hab game and simply fast forward through the debate stuff anyways).

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd prefer no video review, we just accept that referees are human and thus not infallible.

 

If we need to have video reviews, I would set a tight time limit on those: the video review team has three (?) minutes to review the footage, and at the end of that make a decision. If the call on ice was clearly wrong based on the three-minute review, overrule. If it's correct or the footage is not clear, the call stands.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here is the thing.  Last night's hand pass was obvious... and I want that reviewable cause I don't like that obviously wrong calls are allowed to stand, especially in key moments. 

 

But we've been down this road.  The offside challenge came cause Matt Duchene scored a ridiculous goal where he was 3 feet offside.  They made the rule, and now the unintended consequence is that we have these stupid reviews for things that are a milimetre offside. 

 

I think video review shouldn't be for every single little thing.  It should only be clear and obvious errors by a ref.   I don't want 4 minutes of stoppage to see if a guy's skate was a centimetre off the ice, 40 seconds before the goal was scored.  But I don't want someone scoring a breakaway when they are three feet offside, or that clear hand pass last night. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, DON said:

Of course it is.

This was a brain dead easy reversal to make on a game changing play, why wouldn't you want to have right call and correct?

 

Same as "obvious" off-side calls, puck crossing the goal line, puck over glass, accidental high stick by own teammate etc..but when they take several minutes to hum and haw over a very close call, they should simply go with refs call and move on.

Has the length of game really changed much since reviews came in? Not noticeably that I can tell (but I record every Hab game and simply fast forward through the debate stuff anyways).

 

 

We're heading close to everything being reviewable, which the refs will use as a crutch to never make a call in real time. 

 

Reviews do slow down the game, and it's only going to get worse. 

 

40 minutes ago, tomh009 said:

I'd prefer no video review, we just accept that referees are human and thus not infallible.

 

If we need to have video reviews, I would set a tight time limit on those: the video review team has three (?) minutes to review the footage, and at the end of that make a decision. If the call on ice was clearly wrong based on the three-minute review, overrule. If it's correct or the footage is not clear, the call stands.

 

Alternatively, have the refs only watch the play in real time. If it's a play that can only be discerned through slow motion than it's too close to matter.

 

The offside review was put in place to stop the egregious misses. Now we're checking frames discussing if a player's foot is off the ice.

 

Does anybody know what goaltender interference is? We're watching slow motion replays and debating if a player pushed into brushing a goalie is a penalty, inadvertent, or completely fine.

 

It's not hockey. If coaches want refs to have a closer look, cool, but if it can't be found in a real time review then so be it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The hand pass win was a game changer. So was the perron puck over glass non call where he scored a goal. Not sure if he should have been in the box but he scored it not long after the missed call. I hate these and sometimes I wish they could be reviewable. The timing is a big issue though. The reviews need to happen fast or not at all. Like 30 seconds fast. Hire more people to have video available immediately.  All done in house by refs. No Toronto time wasting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Make it a Jumbotron decision.  If it is so obvious that when the refs look at the Jumbotron, they're able to change or make a decision, than go with it. 

 

Otherwise, the call on the ice stands. 

 

:D

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Average length of NHL game:

86-87  2hour 36minutes

03-04  2hour 19minutes

18-19  2hour 20minutes

(just one source, but about what i expected, other than 80s length of game)

 

So, what is the issue, length of game hasnt changed in long time (other than significantly dropped from long ago)? Review everything that needs to be reviewed. Why do we need only specific things reviewed and the rest ignored?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, JoeLassister said:

Make it a Jumbotron decision.  If it is so obvious that when the refs look at the Jumbotron, they're able to change or make a decision, than go with it. 

 

Otherwise, the call on the ice stands. 

 

:D

 

 

Seriously, there is no reason why they can't have a look at the jumbotron, and see the same replays that analysts, and fans, are going to be seeing and torching them over the next day. Take the 20 seconds it takes to watch the replays live on the big screen in the 3 angles they show and in slow mo at every damn game. Problem solved, they see what we see, no phone calls, no bs, just a simple, "Hold on guys i'm taking a look at this real quick to make sure i got that last call right.....Nope, totally buggered it, the goal does no stand because there was a hand pass back there that I missed in the action, face off in the offensive zone, lets go."

 

There is seriously something wrong if the people at home watching, and commentators/analysts, can tell within 30 seconds of a play that something blatant is missed, but the actual refs have to do this job with 100% accuracy, in real time only? How many times could a play, a penalty, or a goal, be overturned just by simply watching the multiple angles on the jumbotron for 30 seconds, we have to stop acting like this would take 5 min of our time every time. That would only be the case if everything they wanted to see had to go through Toronto, if they can see what we see, they would be able to make quick decisions on a matter if they felt it was conclusive enough to over turn their prior judgement. How many times would they look up and see a replay of 2 guys going at it in a scrum, and notice the guy they didn't penalize started the whole thing with a cross check under the ribs that went undetected and you only penalized one guy for retaliation? They could then over turn their previous decision  and penalize the other guy as well, as it should have, instead we hear the analysts talk about that's just how it is, it is always the guy who retaliates that gets the call. How many weak penalties could be over turned with a quick look at the replay on the jumbotron, the same one the player watches in the box before he starts freaking out about how bad of a call it was in the box? How many diving calls get changed? How many players near the crease get off on situations where the D from the other team shoves him into his own goalie, but all the refs see is a body tumbling over the goalie and call it right then and there?

 

The list of potential resolutions something this simple would provide goes on and on, the fact it hasn't even been introduced yet, to me, is a joke, and complete utter nonsense, it is like stubborn and dated views of how this game should be officiated still remain, impeding logical progress as a result. Lets keep officiating the game on the ice the same way we did 30 years ago, even though the game has sped up leaps and bounds since then, making it insanely difficult to nail every call from ice level, that should work just fine...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, DON said:

Average length of NHL game:

86-87  2hour 36minutes

03-04  2hour 19minutes

18-19  2hour 20minutes

(just one source, but about what i expected, other than 80s length of game)

 

So, what is the issue, length of game hasnt changed in long time (other than significantly dropped from long ago)? Review everything that needs to be reviewed. Why do we need only specific things reviewed and the rest ignored?

For me it's less about the length of the game And more about interrupting the flow of the game. Resting players. Momentum swings. Stuff like that. Taking 5 minutes to determine an offside is too much.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, BCHabnut said:

For me it's less about the length of the game And more about interrupting the flow of the game. Resting players. Momentum swings. Stuff like that. Taking 5 minutes to determine an offside is too much.

Are the players complaining about delays?:spamafote:

If they are against replays and can all live without bitching about a hand pass to win Stanley cup...which is basically the total opposite of what happened yesterday. Even the GM or coach was beating on refs door cursing away over the missed call.

 

I wonder if Don Denkinger would of liked to have replay option, to overturn his blown call in 1985 world series?:popcorn:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, DON said:

Are the players complaining about delays?:spamafote:

If they are against replays and can all live without bitching about a hand pass to win Stanley cup...which is basically the total opposite of what happened yesterday. Even the GM or coach was beating on refs door cursing away over the missed call.

 

I wonder if Don Denkinger would of liked to have replay option, to overturn his blown call in 1985 world series?:popcorn:

Nope. That one passed the 5 second rule. So did the perron puck over glass. If you can see it right away on replay then call it. If you need a forensics team and a  group of physicists and 5 minutes, let it be.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The players back skate was 1/1000th of an inch off the ice at the same time the puck was 1/10000th of an inch across the blue line. Therefore there is no goal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, BCHabnut said:

The players back skate was 1/1000th of an inch off the ice at the same time the puck was 1/10000th of an inch across the blue line. Therefore there is no goal.

Yes 100% agree that if splitting hairs,  when already have a ref calling it one way or the other...go with ref's call if "reasonable".

 

(tennis seems to have some great digital ways of determining in/out and doesnt take minutes)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, BCHabnut said:

For me it's less about the length of the game And more about interrupting the flow of the game. Resting players. Momentum swings. Stuff like that. Taking 5 minutes to determine an offside is too much.

 

This right here.

 

I don't give a crap how the players feel about it. It's about the entertainment value of the product. This is hockey, not Supreme Court of Canada Hearings on CPAC.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Carolina really put up a fight against Boston.  Hahaha. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, DON said:

Average length of NHL game:

86-87  2hour 36minutes

03-04  2hour 19minutes

18-19  2hour 20minutes

(just one source, but about what i expected, other than 80s length of game)

 

So, what is the issue, length of game hasnt changed in long time (other than significantly dropped from long ago)? Review everything that needs to be reviewed. Why do we need only specific things reviewed and the rest ignored?

In the 80s all the benchclearing brawls increased the average gamelenght with 15 minutes. 😆

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Commandant said:

Here is the thing.  Last night's hand pass was obvious... and I want that reviewable cause I don't like that obviously wrong calls are allowed to stand, especially in key moments. 

 

But we've been down this road.  The offside challenge came cause Matt Duchene scored a ridiculous goal where he was 3 feet offside.  They made the rule, and now the unintended consequence is that we have these stupid reviews for things that are a milimetre offside. 

 

I think video review shouldn't be for every single little thing.  It should only be clear and obvious errors by a ref.   I don't want 4 minutes of stoppage to see if a guy's skate was a centimetre off the ice, 40 seconds before the goal was scored.  But I don't want someone scoring a breakaway when they are three feet offside, or that clear hand pass last night. 

Well said!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, DON said:

Average length of NHL game:

86-87  2hour 36minutes

03-04  2hour 19minutes

18-19  2hour 20minutes

(just one source, but about what i expected, other than 80s length of game)

 

So, what is the issue, length of game hasnt changed in long time (other than significantly dropped from long ago)? Review everything that needs to be reviewed. Why do we need only specific things reviewed and the rest ignored?

 

The world has changed.  People want their sports faster and faster in 2019 than they did in 1987.  The availability of thousands of tv channels, and information at your fingertips with the internet is changing the world. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, Commandant said:

 

The world has changed.  People want their sports faster and faster in 2019 than they did in 1987.  The availability of thousands of tv channels, and information at your fingertips with the internet is changing the world. 

It is interesting.  I find it depends a bit on your perspective.  I always find a game goes by way to fast when I am there to see it live.  Watching on television - it always seems longer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The average hockey fan is less patient these days? Hmm, dont know about that, given hockeyfans going bonkers often on social media debating every little issue.

Fewer kids play hockey or give a crap about sports in general, i would agree with that. But, what that has to do with replays or no replays and current hockeyfans i dunno.

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, DON said:

The average hockey fan is less patient these days? Hmm, dont know about that, given hockeyfans going bonkers often on social media debating every little issue.

Fewer kids play hockey or give a crap about sports in general, i would agree with that. But, what that has to do with replays or no replays and current hockeyfans i dunno.

 

 

 

 

Social media like Twitter is less than 10% of the total fan base, its not a representative sample of fans. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×