Quote:
Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague
No you would not. This is a false assumption. A review to determine whether a goal would have counted or not is not also a review of whether something was a penalty. The same standard applies to goaltender interference.
|
Then they would have to change the rule to include that, making the rule more vague is what I'm saying, Refs would have to assess intent in playing with a broken stick and in most cases if the intent is there a penalty is going to be called already.
Also is there really a reason why the goal shouldn't have counted beyond theres a rule that says you can't play with a broken stick? 9 times out of 10 his stick stays intact and he still scores. Its not quite the same as goaltender interference
Quote:
Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague
And the ref (or whoever is assessing the play) would then decide, looking at the footage, whether it was broken in his estimation and make a determination as to whether the goal should count, rather than having to do so in real time without the benefit of a bunch of different angles and slow motion. Why is this difficult?
|
Well this is a part of the whole review discussion, who does the reviewing and who has the final say? Do they let the refs get a monitor and a chance to take a second look or does everything go through the command centre where they have more technology and better views? Does there have to be enough evidence to overturn the call on the ice or is it up to the discretion of the reviewer? If there does have to be enough evidence to overturn it how often are they just going to stick with the call on the ice? If its more often then not from a business standpoint the NHL wouldn't want it to be a reviewable play because it creates an unnecessary slow down.
If it was as easy as hey every play should be reviewable and coach's should be able to challenge it would already be that way.