The Future of Video Review

[Glug Datt]

After a bit of a puzzling call, San Jose completes the most improbable comeback, one for the history books. I don't think I've ever seen more than 2 goals on a major penalty. Hats off to the Sharks for feeding on the energy and making the most of the opportunity. It was literally a feeding frenzy, absolutely amazing. 

 

This game will be remembered for ages... but not only because of the staggering comeback...

 

In retrospect, I believe it would be hard to find anyone who truly believes 'The Call' was the right one - players, fans, management, refs, Pavelski... anyone. Possible exceptions would be people who don't understand the game (my wife for instance), Bettman (because he's a moron), and people who don't have access to video review. 

 

During the intermission, the panel got into a good discussion about the penalty call, and then the opinions about the use of video review started. 

 

I believe it was Elliott that suggested giving the help to the refs when they need it. He even suggested using it for delay of game calls. I'm of the understanding that they want to leave as much power as they can with the on-ice officials, but instances like this don't help. 

 

I think most would agree a minor penalty could have been called, maybe SJ scores, and they're back in it, no big deal. In most circumstances, even on a major, they score 1 or 2, they're back in it, game gets exciting.

 

But because of the outcome of the resulting power play, the entire game was changed and obviously the seasons of 2 franchises end differently than expected. Players, management, owners, and fans alike are either outraged or elated, but shocked either way. 

 

Does this game become the point we look back to as the start of the Video Review Era? 

 

 

[goalie13]

22 minutes ago, Glug Datt said:

After a bit of a puzzling call, San Jose completes the most improbable comeback, one for the history books.

I think it was a case where the refs saw something happen, saw the result and jumped to a conclusion.  I agree that it should have been a two-minute cross checking penalty, but I am hoping that it doesn't prompt changes to the video review rules.

 

I feel video review has already gone too far with the off-side rule.  There are always going to be calls that get missed and calls that are a mystery.  You can't review everything.  If you are going to open up 5-minute majors to review then don't you also have to add the ability to review other calls that could have been a 5 minute major?  Where do you draw the line?

 

As for the puck-over-the-glass rule, I feel it should be downgraded to be the same as an icing call.  It's too punitive.  But that's a totally separate argument.

[Baer.]

41 minutes ago, Glug Datt said:

 

 

Does this game become the point we look back to as the start of the Video Review Era? 

 

 

No. No system will be perfect. Video review makes sure the obvious calls are made right. As a side effect it also enhances the debate of very near calls. I say, it doesn't matter what YOU THINK the call should have been. The video review isn't for you to make your decision. It's for the refs to help make their decision. Don't like the call? Too bad. Refs decision is final. Same as it's always been.

[Mackcanuck]

Video review called this a legal goal, not contacted by a high stick

 

[D-Money]

40 minutes ago, Mackcanuck said:

Video review called this a legal goal, not contacted by a high stick

 

No kidding.

 

I have no time for the Vegas players/fans whining about the 5-minute major last night. Because between this goal and the phantom goalie interference that erased the Sharks' 4th goal in game 2, that penalty at worst made the bad calls square. It was Vegas' fault that they folded on the PK, and couldn't finish in OT.

Edited April 24, 2019 by D-Money

[SilentSam]

1 hour ago, Mackcanuck said:

Video review called this a legal goal, not contacted by a high stick

 

 That’s not the right angles to show that fairly.

to show that fairly the net and those 90 degree lines must slide along the end zone line to be 90 degrees of the puck position.

[Baer.]

1 hour ago, Mackcanuck said:

Video review called this a legal goal, not contacted by a high stick

 

Pretty sure Eakin's hip is not crossbar height. The angle creates an illusion. The call they made was the right one.

[Mackcanuck]

Eakin is 6ft tall, 6' 3" on skates, his stick is straight out from his shoulders, the bottom of his armpits, probably 5 ft above the ice

The crossbar is 4ft high, He makes contact with his stick above the crossbar 

That line is not at hip height, more like the bottom of his ribcage

Edited April 24, 2019 by Mackcanuck

[Glug Datt]

On 4/24/2019 at 9:12 AM, D-Money said:

No kidding.

 

I have no time for the Vegas players/fans whining about the 5-minute major last night. Because between this goal and the phantom goalie interference that erased the Sharks' 4th goal in game 2, that penalty at worst made the bad calls square. It was Vegas' fault that they folded on the PK, and couldn't finish in OT.

I hear ya there.. 

 

I wonder how many teams would be comfortable having their play put under a microscope.. they might be surprised where it all balances out. 

 

Having the league apologise to VGK really makes a statement though. It's obviously going to be a talking point at the next GM meeting.

 

I think it's just a matter of time before they start working with video assist refs, maybe in the preseason to start.. 

 

 

[Schmautzie]

How about letting a coach have a penalty call reviewed as part of his one coach’s challenge allowed per game?

 

And get rid of the offside review altogether.

[Glug Datt]

Wow..

 

Another botched call that happens to favour San Jose. I don't really care who wins or loses games at this point, but this has bad optics.. it's becoming clear that in the end the real loser will be the league..

 

As the fans have access to more quality footage from better angles, the missed calls are becoming more frequent and more glaringly obvious.. and unless the situation is dealt with soon, the officiating, the war room & the league will start to look pretty suspect. (more than normal that is) 

 

I keep hearing the excuse of not wanting to slow the game any more, but I think fans will demand fairness.. especially when everybody knows what really happened. 

 

the refs have always been somewhat incompetent, but now they're being thrown under the bus as well

[King Heffy]

1 minute ago, Glug Datt said:

Wow..

 

Another botched call that happens to favour San Jose. I don't really care who wins or loses games at this point, but this has bad optics.. it's becoming clear that in the end the real loser will be the league..

 

As the fans have access to more quality footage from better angles, the missed calls are becoming more frequent and more glaringly obvious.. and unless the situation is dealt with soon, the officiating, the war room & the league will start to look pretty suspect. (more than normal that is) 

 

I keep hearing the excuse of not wanting to slow the game any more, but I think fans will demand fairness.. especially when everybody knows what really happened. 

 

the refs have always been somewhat incompetent, but now they're being thrown under the bus as well

I think the blatantly corrupt/incompetent officiating we are getting treated to this playoffs might be the catalyst we need for the league to start holding the zebras accountable.  If not now, this is a real possibility when we finally get a real commissioner.   At this point, San Jose should get an asterisk next to their name on the Stanley Cup if they win.  The fact that the league knows this calls the integrity of any further games into question, as I'm sure Bettman wants to minimize the visibility of the match fixing.

[Glug Datt]

9 hours ago, King Heffy said:

I think the blatantly corrupt/incompetent officiating we are getting treated to this playoffs might be the catalyst we need for the league to start holding the zebras accountable.  If not now, this is a real possibility when we finally get a real commissioner.   At this point, San Jose should get an asterisk next to their name on the Stanley Cup if they win.  The fact that the league knows this calls the integrity of any further games into question, as I'm sure Bettman wants to minimize the visibility of the match fixing.

I hear what your saying, but there would need to be a lot of asterisks then.. 2011 comes to mind, with Rome getting over-suspended on a first offense, while somebody's son is playing on the Bruins..  Dallas scored to win the cup with Hull in the crease. I remember watching Quebec carry the puck up ice on a delayed penalty call, then Montreal got the puck, carried it back and scored.. huh? but the goal stood and Montreal won. these things happen.. 

 

is it corruption? who could say.. but every year there's awful calls & non - calls alike that shape the playoffs. the thing is, a lot of the time the calls are made within the rules, and it's the rules that need to change. 

 

either way, there's been so much chatter now, and I think it's all leading up to change

[King Heffy]

16 minutes ago, Glug Datt said:

I hear what your saying, but there would need to be a lot of asterisks then.. 2011 comes to mind, with Rome getting over-suspended on a first offense, while somebody's son is playing on the Bruins..  Dallas scored to win the cup with Hull in the crease. I remember watching Quebec carry the puck up ice on a delayed penalty call, then Montreal got the puck, carried it back and scored.. huh? but the goal stood and Montreal won. these things happen.. 

 

is it corruption? who could say.. but every year there's awful calls & non - calls alike that shape the playoffs. the thing is, a lot of the time the calls are made within the rules, and it's the rules that need to change. 

 

either way, there's been so much chatter now, and I think it's all leading up to change

Personally I think both Boston and Dallas should have asterisks.

[Glug Datt]

4 hours ago, King Heffy said:

Personally I think both Boston and Dallas should have asterisks.

could easily.. especially Dallas.. 

 

but if you combed the forums around the league, I'd guess you would find fairly sensible arguments for asterisks on most series wins and many cup wins. 

 

I think the problem has always been there, whether it's corruption or not.. the difference now is the availability of information.. the league has taken great strides in bringing the viewer deep into the game experience, which is great, but the tech brings with it new problems.. when the viewer at home can do a better job of officiating than the refs on the ice, that's a problem.. so the solution likely lies with the same tech being used to the benefit of the refs as well.. 

[Hairy Kneel]

Don Cherry suggested an ear piece to help out the on ice refs to keep them up to speed.

 

[mll]

NHL Sr. executive VP of hockey ops Colin Campbell on the miscalls during the playoffs and the use of video review.

 

 

[Glug Datt]

An new article released says that a competition committee was formed consisting of players & gm's, and has recommended among other things, changes to video review & coach's challenge. 

 

"The committee recommended expanded video review which would include a referee’s ability to review calls on the ice" 

 

It doesn't really give much in the way of details other than to say "The NHLPA’s executive board along with the league’s board of governors still need to approve the new rule recommendations." 

 

https://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/nhl/nhl-competition-committee-recommends-video-review-tiebreaker-changes/

[mll]

 

[Hairy Kneel]

Put one ref on video review in game. He can be on ice,  behind the glass. Watching in real time with a earpiece with the on ice ref. He can monitor off sides, line changes, embellys, goals and goalie interf. He can access the ice when needed. He can share info for every on ice officials confab.