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.
Per Elliotte Friedman, they're discussing whether to review "everything" in the last 2 minutes, as they do in the NFL. What that should be is a review of all goals within the last 5 minutes and overtime to make sure they should be goals. Some of those reviews will take ten seconds, but it's still worth doing.
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?
|
The problem with this play (in the ability for it to be reviewed) is that there is no rule explicitly saying a goal with a broken stick shall not count. The reason its should not be a goal is for two reasons. 1st, player playing with a broken stick is a penalty under 10.3, so the ref would then be calling a delayed penalty on Detroit.
Then when the puck goes in it will not count because according to the rule book no goal shall count if there is a delayed penalty and the puck entered the net from any reason other than the defending team touching it last. Since Detroit would have touched it last the goal shouldn't have counted.
The problem with this play is that even with the review they are thinking of implementing I'm pretty sure they don't want to use review to give penalties after the fact. If the ref doesn't call a penalty on the play during the play, there is nothing explicitly illegal about the way the puck entered the net.