GM Meetings: NHL to amend offside rule? "breaking the plane"

[sureLoss]

Darren Dreger @DarrenDreger
After 3 years of discussions, it appears the NHL will amend the offside rule. Skate in the air...or breaking the plane is expected to be part of the change.

Elliotte Friedman @FriedgeHNIC
Competition Committee must approve all potential rule changes....but it appears as if GMs have voted to amend offside rule to football-style “breaking the plane.”

[Robbob]

good. I think that is the change everyone wanted when they were looking to tweak the rule last time.

[TheScorpion]

It's about time.

[PeteMoss]

They should change the offside review to clear and obvious. This just changes the threshold of the rule, you'll still have those 5 minute reviews to break down if the guy's skate was a mm away from the blue line

[SuperMatt18]

Other rules they should change:

1) You still get the PP if you don't score on the penalty shot.

The penalty shot should be treated the same as a delayed penalty call to me. The penalty shot replaces the chance that was eliminated by the penalty, if you don't score you still get the 2 minute PP just like if a normal penalty was called on the play instead.

2) Align the rules of the blue line on what is considered in/out of the zone.

When entering the zone the puck needs to be considered completely over the blue line to be in the zone, but when exiting the zone the puck needs to completely exit the blue line to be considered out. So in the two situations the way the "blue ice" is handled is different. They should make it the same, and once the puck hits the blue ice it should be considered in the zone, just like it's considered in the zone still as long as it's on the blue ice once already entered.

[Joborule]

Other rules they should change:

1) You still get the PP if you don't score on the penalty shot.

The penalty shot should be treated the same as a delayed penalty call to me. The penalty shot replaces the chance that was eliminated by the penalty, if you don't score you still get the 2 minute PP just like if a normal penalty was called on the play instead.

2) Align the rules of the blue line on what is considered in/out of the zone.

When entering the zone the puck needs to be considered completely over the blue line to be in the zone, but when exiting the zone the puck needs to completely exit the blue line to be considered out. So in the two situations the way the "blue ice" is handled is different. They should make it the same, and once the puck hits the blue ice it should be considered in the zone, just like it's considered in the zone still as long as it's on the blue ice once already entered.

I agree with both.

[CalgaryFan1988]

I've never noticed a professional league change the rules as much as the NHL.

[Jason14h]

I've never noticed a professional league change the rules as much as the NHL.

Literally every league does rule changes every offseason.

[dissentowner]

Not that it matters much when the officiating is so incompetent.

[FlamesAddiction]

I know I am probably going to feel stupid for asking, but what exactly does "skate in the air" and "breaking the plane" mean?

[Weitz]

I know I am probably going to feel stupid for asking, but what exactly does "skate in the air" and "breaking the plane" mean?

You won;t need your skate on the ice for it to be onside, it can be in the air above the blue line. Eliminating those off side reviews where the guy has lifted his skate in the air and is above the blue line.

[nfotiu]

Literally every league does rule changes every offseason.

These discussions should happen in the offseason though. GMs shouldn't vote that a rule needs to be changed and then continue to play out a season with what they determined is a bad rule.

[Jiggy]

Not that it matters much when the officiating is so incompetent.

For how fast the game is I think the refs get a lot more things right than wrong.

[CalgaryFan1988]

I know I am probably going to feel stupid for asking, but what exactly does "skate in the air" and "breaking the plane" mean?

It means they won't be able to see it clearly. So instead of having a black and white rule, they will make it grey and up to interpretation.

For further clarification, google "Superbowl Touchdown Controversy 2020".


.

[The Cobra]

They should change the offside review to clear and obvious. This just changes the threshold of the rule, you'll still have those 5 minute reviews to break down if the guy's skate was a mm away from the blue line

There will then be 5 minutes reviews if something is clear and obvious.

Whatever threshold is used, there will be questions as to whether that threshold is met.

[Fuzz]

Hopefully the upgrade the blue line potato cams too, otherwise it's going to be tricky to spot in some situations. An overhead positioned laser mesh would help, but that's far to advanced for them.

[dissentowner]

For how fast the game is I think the refs get a lot more things right than wrong.

No, no they don't. We see it time and again an official staring right at the infraction and no call or they make a weak one. The game is not called by infractions, it is dictated by game management and until that changes the product will continue to be frustrating to watch.

[dissentowner]

There will then be 5 minutes reviews if something is clear and obvious.

Whatever threshold is used, there will be questions as to whether that threshold is met.

They should just do away with offside challenges. Half the time the war room doesn't get it right anyhow. Again, I think that is a game management thing.

[Hemi-Cuda]

I wish they'd go further. A player entering the zone a fraction of a second ahead of the puck doesn't make a realistic difference in the play, and all the rule does is slow down the game. I'm not sure they even need the offside rule, would teams really put a cherry picker in the offensive zone and give the other team a 5-on-4? If you must have offsides, then put a timer on it. If a player enters the zone within 1 second of the puck, then it doesn't matter who was first

[Roof-Daddy]

The worst thing about professional sports officiating is "discretion".

It's terribly inconsistent at best, blatantly biased at worst.

[Resolute 14]

These discussions should happen in the offseason though. GMs shouldn't vote that a rule needs to be changed and then continue to play out a season with what they determined is a bad rule.

Discussions happen constantly. But the final decision is that of the competition committee, and that happens in the off-season. What is happening now is teams are approving a potential rule change to send to the committee.

[nfotiu]

They should just do away with offside challenges. Half the time the war room doesn't get it right anyhow. Again, I think that is a game management thing.

The off side challenge always seemed un-balanced to me. Why take away goals using video assistance, when you can't restore a goal someone might have scored when an off-side was called incorrectly? Both scenarios have just as much impact on the game.

Unless they are going to let all close plays go, and go to video on every goal, it just seems like a bad rule.

[MrMike]

So now that it is a plane, does that mean any part of your body can be in the plane to stay onside or will it still have to be one of your two skates?

We will see a large increase in players stretching back with their arms on every entry.

[the2bears]

I wish they'd go further. A player entering the zone a fraction of a second ahead of the puck doesn't make a realistic difference in the play, and all the rule does is slow down the game. I'm not sure they even need the offside rule, would teams really put a cherry picker in the offensive zone and give the other team a 5-on-4? If you must have offsides, then put a timer on it. If a player enters the zone within 1 second of the puck, then it doesn't matter who was first

It would be difficult to "put a timer on it", leading to more discretionary calls.

[Textcritic]

There will then be 5 minutes reviews if something is clear and obvious.

Whatever threshold is used, there will be questions as to whether that threshold is met.
I think the solution to this is twofold:

1) Eliminate all on-ice video-review, and have everything done in Toronto by third-party officials.

2) Set a strict time-limit on reviews. The call has to be made within 30 seconds, or something to that effect.

[Red_Baron]

I wish they'd go further. A player entering the zone a fraction of a second ahead of the puck doesn't make a realistic difference in the play, and all the rule does is slow down the game. I'm not sure they even need the offside rule, would teams really put a cherry picker in the offensive zone and give the other team a 5-on-4? If you must have offsides, then put a timer on it. If a player enters the zone within 1 second of the puck, then it doesn't matter who was first


They can't do away with offsides. Could you imagine trying to kill a 2 man advantage when the other team can set up anywhere on the ice? Or if a player can streak straight for the net as soon as your team gains possesion? The timer thing might work but I like making the blue line into a plane as a better idea.

Part of having a good hockey IQ is being able to time yourself to stay onside.

[IamNotKenKing]

I wish they'd go further. A player entering the zone a fraction of a second ahead of the puck doesn't make a realistic difference in the play, and all the rule does is slow down the game. I'm not sure they even need the offside rule, would teams really put a cherry picker in the offensive zone and give the other team a 5-on-4? If you must have offsides, then put a timer on it. If a player enters the zone within 1 second of the puck, then it doesn't matter who was first

Who counts the seconds and when do they start to count?
Who decides if the guy is involved in the play?
What if the defender moved to cover the guy who was offside, leaving someone else open and uncovered?
Offside is offside, and degrees of offside or amount of time offside adds a massive grey area.

[You Need a Thneed]

So now that it is a plane, does that mean any part of your body can be in the plane to stay onside or will it still have to be one of your two skates?

We will see a large increase in players stretching back with their arms on every entry.

I can imagine skaters in figure skating poses with their leg stuck straight backwards, way in the air.

I’ve long thought a good solution was to have a different standard for when offside is called in real time, vs when it is reviewed on replay. In real time, the Linesman calls offside if the skate is not on the ice, however, if it goes to replay, than simply breaking the plane above the line is acceptable.

[You Need a Thneed]

Other rules they should change:

When entering the zone the puck needs to be considered completely over the blue line to be in the zone, but when exiting the zone the puck needs to completely exit the blue line to be considered out. So in the two situations the way the "blue ice" is handled is different. They should make it the same, and once the puck hits the blue ice it should be considered in the zone, just like it's considered in the zone still as long as it's on the blue ice once already entered.

I don’t have an issue with the line itself being part of whatever zone the puck is coming out of - as it currently is.

However, what makes no sense is that for coming out of the zone, the puck has to come all the way across the line, but a player has to only skate on the line, not over it.

Whatever the rule is, make it the same for both puck and player.

[CaptainYooh]

Every game in NHL must end with interviewing players on both teams about their take on how good McDavid is regardless of which teams are playing. NHL never goes far enough to address what hockey fans really wanna know. Superficial changes only. Disappointed.

[Lubicon]

I like this proposed change. I would also like to see a further tweak to the offside challenge to eliminate the ability to challenge a play that may have been offside but didn't affect the play. For example the play is challenged as offside after a goal - if the defending team gained and then lost possession of the puck it is still a goal.

[DuffMan]

Other rules they should change:

1) You still get the PP if you don't score on the penalty shot.

The penalty shot should be treated the same as a delayed penalty call to me. The penalty shot replaces the chance that was eliminated by the penalty, if you don't score you still get the 2 minute PP just like if a normal penalty was called on the play instead.

2) Align the rules of the blue line on what is considered in/out of the zone.

When entering the zone the puck needs to be considered completely over the blue line to be in the zone, but when exiting the zone the puck needs to completely exit the blue line to be considered out. So in the two situations the way the "blue ice" is handled is different. They should make it the same, and once the puck hits the blue ice it should be considered in the zone, just like it's considered in the zone still as long as it's on the blue ice once already entered.


#1 is something I have thought of every time Johnny hockey fails to score on a PS.

Also think a team should be allowed only, say 5, icings per period and then they get a penalty. I know it would be iffy with the Linesmans judgement on if the player is skating hard enough to get back, or if the offensive player could make it to the puck first, but something should be done about intentional icings.

[Scroopy Noopers]

So now that it is a plane, does that mean any part of your body can be in the plane to stay onside or will it still have to be one of your two skates?

We will see a large increase in players stretching back with their arms on every entry.

I can guarantee this won’t happen.

[oldschoolcalgary]

Breaking the plane is easier for sure, just like the NFL.

i think that they should rule out slow motion and limit the discussion to 1 min review. If you can't decide in a minute, the offside wasn't egregious enough to actually affect the play

[Resolute 14]

For offside calls, the review should take 3 seconds. If you can't tell it's off side by a single replay of the television feed, call on the ice stands. That would fit the spirit of the rule as it was intended.

Course, soccer is dealing with the same problem, as VAR was originally brought in for "clear and obvious" misses only. But now they too are measuring off-sides in millimetres and pausing multiple times every match to re-assess pretty much any carded foul.

[FlamingHabs Fan]

I feel like there is enough tech out there that there could be a real-time offside sensor created.
I hate to take the human factor out of the reffing (for good or bad) but this crap has to stop. They did well with the penalty for a wrong challenge, but still I think more could be done.

Only thing now is that the linesmen would only have icing, high sticks, minor stuff to call.

[GioforPM]

I can guarantee this won’t happen.

The next argument would be that the stick is an extension of the arm.

[mrchristy31]

If you are looking at rule changes, how about making it icing regardless if the linesmen thinks the defensman can get to the puck or not. If the player clears the zone hard enough to cross the icing line and a defender doesn't touch it, it is automatically icing (if he beats the opposing player to the hash marks)...............take the judgement calls out of it.

[DeluxeMoustache]

I wish they would focus on what matters

Defining offside slightly differently - how does it improve the game?
Accelerating the review process - same question

I agree with resolute. A few seconds should be all the time granted for the review. Maybe 30 seconds, like a linesman’s timeout.

Catch the egregious errors that have a material impact, and don’t waste time splitting hairs.

Defining a plane vs skate on the ice is as valuable as splitting hairs.

[Scroopy Noopers]

I wish they would focus on what matters

Defining offside slightly differently - how does it improve the game?
Accelerating the review process - same question

I agree with resolute. A few seconds should be all the time granted for the review. Maybe 30 seconds, like a linesman’s timeout.

Catch the egregious errors that have a material impact, and don’t waste time splitting hairs.

Defining a plane vs skate on the ice is as valuable as splitting hairs.

That’s exactly what this fixes. Most of the long offside reviews I’ve seen they have been trying to decide if the skate is off the ice or not.

[DeluxeMoustache]

If you are looking at rule changes, how about making it icing regardless if the linesmen thinks the defensman can get to the puck or not. If the player clears the zone hard enough to cross the icing line and a defender doesn't touch it, it is automatically icing (if he beats the opposing player to the hash marks)...............take the judgement calls out of it.


I think the opposite. More waved off icing, to speed up the game.

The intent of icing was to not reward a team for relieving pressure.

Consider a good stretch pass that just misses. Wave it off. It wasn’t a desperate team trying to dump the puck out, it was an aggressive team trying to score.

Don’t penalize that

[Scroopy Noopers]

If you are looking at rule changes, how about making it icing regardless if the linesmen thinks the defensman can get to the puck or not. If the player clears the zone hard enough to cross the icing line and a defender doesn't touch it, it is automatically icing (if he beats the opposing player to the hash marks)...............take the judgement calls out of it.

If there is one thing the NHL is consistent on its that when they make a rule change that ends up being ridiculous, they stick with it.

[DeluxeMoustache]

That’s exactly what this fixes. Most of the long offside reviews I’ve seen they have been trying to decide if the skate is off the ice or not.

Because that’s how offside is defined now.

So now they need to determine if part of the players body further away vertically from the line is over the line? Oh, that oughta end well

[Scroopy Noopers]

Because that’s how offside is defined now.

So now they need to determine if part of the players body further away vertically from the line is over the line? Oh, that oughta end well

... that isn’t difficult. This is how they determine who finishes races. It’s as simple as a vertical red line.

[DeluxeMoustache]

... that isn’t difficult. This is how they determine who finishes races. It’s as simple as a vertical red line.

Well, the finish line of a race is clear before it is crossed, and everyone is going the same direction...

And not being “difficult” doesn’t contemplate that this is being handled by the NHL

[Scroopy Noopers]

Well, the finish line of a race is clear before it is crossed, and everyone is going the same direction...

And not being “difficult” doesn’t contemplate that this is being handled by the NHL

I could feel myself alley-oop’ing you that one. I agree.

[FireGilbert]

So they are making it harder for linesmen to make the call on the ice so it will be easier to make the call on video? Seems like overthinking to me. Just get rid of the stupid offside review and live with the odd missed call.

[Robbob]

Get rid of the coaches challenge (or really limit them)and have it like the NFL where the war room reviews all scoring plays to make sure they are legit.

[Bingo]

I think the solution to this is twofold:

1) Eliminate all on-ice video-review, and have everything done in Toronto by third-party officials.

2) Set a strict time-limit on reviews. The call has to be made within 30 seconds, or something to that effect.

I'd like to see all goals deemed in the net called good goals, and replay only to overturn them to non goals.

Do away with the poor guy on the ice trying to make a snap judgement at light speed where he says no goal and then the threshold to overturn the initial call is too steep to make a good goal stand.

[DeluxeMoustache]

I'd like to see all goals deemed in the net called good goals, and replay only to overturn them to non goals.

Do away with the poor guy on the ice trying to make a snap judgement at light speed where he says no goal and then the threshold to overturn the initial call is too steep to make a good goal stand.

I’m on the other side here. Probably would like to see how many calls are actually overturned before even beginning to consider this

Maybe you could get them to agree to be paid less if you are reducing their decision making ability

[TheSaint]

An idea for a change; if a player takes a penalty in the last minute to prevent a tying goal the 3rd period is extended by a minute or until a tying goal is scored. You're supposed to try to not take a penalty but there's no downside to mugging a player with under ten seconds to go.

[DeluxeMoustache]

An idea for a change; if a player takes a penalty in the last minute to prevent a tying goal the 3rd period is extended by a minute or until a tying goal is scored. You're supposed to try to not take a penalty but there's no downside to mugging a player with under ten seconds to go.


Well... the Flames would have nothing to worry about

*grumble, grumble*
*stupid Nashville*

[Red_Baron]

An idea for a change; if a player takes a penalty in the last minute to prevent a tying goal the 3rd period is extended by a minute or until a tying goal is scored. You're supposed to try to not take a penalty but there's no downside to mugging a player with under ten seconds to go.
Maybe award a penalty shot for any infraction in the defensive zone with less than 10 seconds left on the clock? That would make for a pretty strong deterrent.

[Moneyhands23]

Not that it matters much when the officiating is so incompetent.

Lol.No doubt! I am on board with replacing the ref decisions as much as possible. Chip in the puck, sensors on the lines or whatever.

Also the coaches should be able to publicly call out b.s reffing without getting fined to death

[GirlySports]

For offside calls, the review should take 3 seconds. If you can't tell it's off side by a single replay of the television feed, call on the ice stands. That would fit the spirit of the rule as it was intended.

Course, soccer is dealing with the same problem, as VAR was originally brought in for "clear and obvious" misses only. But now they too are measuring off-sides in millimetres and pausing multiple times every match to re-assess pretty much any carded foul.

Once replay is brought in it has to be by the mm. That's why people are against it.

Say you look at it once and confirm the call. All the telecasts will find other angles and if you're wrong you're in trouble.

It has to be all or nothing.

[GirlySports]

An idea for a change; if a player takes a penalty in the last minute to prevent a tying goal the 3rd period is extended by a minute or until a tying goal is scored. You're supposed to try to not take a penalty but there's no downside to mugging a player with under ten seconds to go.

We need to flush this out.

So it's 5 on 4 with 1:10 left, a minute has been added.

1. If the PP team scores does it go straight to OT?

2. What happens if the PP team takes a penalty in the extended time? Is the game automatically over?

3. What happens if the PK team takes another penalty in the extended time? Is it a 5 on 3? Does another minute get added?

3b. When does the first guy come out of the box?

3c. If the PP team scores on the 5 on 3, does the game go to overtime or do they continue 5 on 4 to win in regulation?

[getbak]

lRd13-JxBkQ

[Fire]

Get rid of he off-side review completely and live with the occasional linesman mistake. The game would be a lot better for it.

[81MC]

The thing with the plane concept that I don’t like: skates in the air. You want those really sharp objects on the ground as much as possible, not incentivizing sticking it out as far as possible.
I doubt anything would happen. But skates being suck out at as close to hip level as possible to stay onside seems like a bad idea to me.

[Zulu29]

The biggest news out of the GM meetings imo is the tracking tech in the pucks which will debut for the playoffs. Would’ve been nice in ‘04....

[PsYcNeT]

https://i.imgur.com/ZZ9ZzPN.png

[Bingo]

I’m on the other side here. Probably would like to see how many calls are actually overturned before even beginning to consider this

Maybe you could get them to agree to be paid less if you are reducing their decision making ability

Calling off a goal after looking at two or three shots 5 times each is fine.

Calling off a goal based on eye sight in a fast moving goal sucks when the tie goes to the call on the ice, and the goal would have stood if they hadn't signalled no goal.

[Oil Stain]

The thing with the plane concept that I don’t like: skates in the air. You want those really sharp objects on the ground as much as possible, not incentivizing sticking it out as far as possible.
I doubt anything would happen. But skates being suck out at as close to hip level as possible to stay onside seems like a bad idea to me.

You foresee players are going to be crossing the blueline like this in the future?

https://image.shutterstock.com/image-photo/perm-russia-january-31-2015-600w-251029612.jpg

I don't think it'll happen. There isn't really any benefit to sticking your leg higher when dragging it to stay onside.

[JackIsBack]

No, no they don't. We see it time and again an official staring right at the infraction and no call or they make a weak one. The game is not called by infractions, it is dictated by game management and until that changes the product will continue to be frustrating to watch.


I totally agree with you. A penalty is penalty no matter when it occurs in a game, or a season, or a playoff run. This whole nonsensical argument of "not wanting to effect the outcome of a game by a penalty call" the so called "putting the whistles away" is actually doing exactly the opposite, it is effecting the game, because according to the rules an infraction was made and wasn't NOT called in one instance or another and called other times. The player knew it was an infraction and got away with it during the "whistles away" time. This always effects the game during the playoffs.... if a team is built on highly skilled players and dominates during the regular season when more penalties are drawn by their players... a team that barely squeaks in the playoffs that's built on more toughness and brute force and interfering with those skilled players can win and knock good teams out because the same infractions aren't called consistently.


The other thing they need to call more often is diving.... and don't take both players off (because that doesn't punish the diver at all) - only the diver or cheater goes. Cheating should be a penalty - and a big one... for example, if not during the attempted save, a goalie knowingly tries to slide the puck out of the net while concealing it by slowly sliding his glove or pad where the puck is in or under out of the net and this is revealed by the referee or during a replay review... the goal counts and penalty is assessed for unsportsmanlike conduct.

[Resolute 14]

Once replay is brought in it has to be by the mm. That's why people are against it.

Say you look at it once and confirm the call. All the telecasts will find other angles and if you're wrong you're in trouble.

It has to be all or nothing.

Of course it doesn't have to be "all or nothing". That's just a ridiculous false dichotomy.

What it comes down to is what level of imperfection you are willing to accept. Because the simple fact is, we will never have perfection in officiating.

So you choose to accept that video replay is only for overturning blatantly obvious errors - which was the original intent and which does not require more than a single replay to determine. Once it's close enough that you need multiple angles and multiple looks, then you accept that that is just part of the normal variance of human limitations.

For things like offside calls or pucks hitting the netting, we shouldn't even be having participants asking for or making the review. All you need is a couple of off-ice officials watching the broadcast who can signal an on-ice official to stop play if they detect an obvious error. Otherwise, you just let play go.

[Mass_nerder]

I wish they'd go further. A player entering the zone a fraction of a second ahead of the puck doesn't make a realistic difference in the play, and all the rule does is slow down the game. I'm not sure they even need the offside rule, would teams really put a cherry picker in the offensive zone and give the other team a 5-on-4? If you must have offsides, then put a timer on it. If a player enters the zone within 1 second of the puck, then it doesn't matter who was first

I agree that in general it doesn't really affect the play, but the problem then becomes how you draw the line to decide the amount a player can be offside before it does start affecting the play?

[rayne008]

I like the updated offside rule, although I think the maximum amount the skate blade can be above the ice is the height of the yellow border at the bottom of the boards, I'm guessing 8".

IMO this image below should not be offside.

If someone is crushed up against the boards and their trailing skate is above the yellow border, offside.

I think they can write is in such a way to allow for a very brief review if necessary.

https://nhl.bamcontent.com/images/photos/280330074/1024x576/cut.jpeg

[FanIn80]

Other rules they should change:

1) You still get the PP if you don't score on the penalty shot.

The penalty shot should be treated the same as a delayed penalty call to me. The penalty shot replaces the chance that was eliminated by the penalty, if you don't score you still get the 2 minute PP just like if a normal penalty was called on the play instead.

2) Align the rules of the blue line on what is considered in/out of the zone.

When entering the zone the puck needs to be considered completely over the blue line to be in the zone, but when exiting the zone the puck needs to completely exit the blue line to be considered out. So in the two situations the way the "blue ice" is handled is different. They should make it the same, and once the puck hits the blue ice it should be considered in the zone, just like it's considered in the zone still as long as it's on the blue ice once already entered.

Agree with both, but if they aren't willing to go all the way with #1 then at least allow teams the option to choose who takes the penalty shot.

[Scroopy Noopers]

You foresee players are going to be crossing the blueline like this in the future?

https://image.shutterstock.com/image-photo/perm-russia-january-31-2015-600w-251029612.jpg

I don't think it'll happen. There isn't really any benefit to sticking your leg higher when dragging it to stay onside.

Exactly. The whole reason players are offside is they are coming in with speed. They will continue to do the same leg drag as always, as it’s the easiest to do without losing too much speed while remaining ready for a pass.

[FanIn80]

You foresee players are going to be crossing the blueline like this in the future?

https://image.shutterstock.com/image-photo/perm-russia-january-31-2015-600w-251029612.jpg

Actual in-game footage of Alex Burrows crossing the blueline.

[GGG]

No, no they don't. We see it time and again an official staring right at the infraction and no call or they make a weak one. The game is not called by infractions, it is dictated by game management and until that changes the product will continue to be frustrating to watch.

What you are actually saying then in the Refs are very good at their jobs.

They just have been given the wrong directives.

[MrMike]

Maybe award a penalty shot for any infraction in the defensive zone with less than 10 seconds left on the clock? That would make for a pretty strong deterrent.

Could you imagine how bad referees would try and control games that way? Just imagine the Oilers with 3 penalty shots in the last ten seconds of a game.

[Resolute 14]

It would be the opposite. Those last seconds would become a literal free for all as the officials call nothing for fear of "deciding the outcome".

[MrMike]

It would be the opposite. Those last seconds would become a literal free for all as the officials call nothing for fear of "deciding the outcome".

Not the games I’ve been watching. I swear most refs have wagers on their games.

[GirlySports]

Of course it doesn't have to be "all or nothing". That's just a ridiculous false dichotomy.

What it comes down to is what level of imperfection you are willing to accept. Because the simple fact is, we will never have perfection in officiating.

So you choose to accept that video replay is only for overturning blatantly obvious errors - which was the original intent and which does not require more than a single replay to determine. Once it's close enough that you need multiple angles and multiple looks, then you accept that that is just part of the normal variance of human limitations.

For things like offside calls or pucks hitting the netting, we shouldn't even be having participants asking for or making the review. All you need is a couple of off-ice officials watching the broadcast who can signal an on-ice official to stop play if they detect an obvious error. Otherwise, you just let play go.

I agree with you. But the media will make the controversy and the aggrieved fans will go nuts.

Its the let it go crowd against the get it right crowd.

[dissentowner]

What you are actually saying then in the Refs are very good at their jobs.

They just have been given the wrong directives.

I think it is a little of both to be honest. Although I would love to know if that is the real issue with officials looking incompetent night in and out. Maybe the game management is a lot more severe than we think. Something is definitely off with the number of obvious calls missed and the amount of soft/ghost calls made though.