Quote:
Originally Posted by calgarygeologist
I don't think a time limit on reviews makes things any better. I want to refs and the league to make the right call. I don't know how things work in the war room but I understand there are multiple cameras and sometimes multiple feeds from different broadcasts and the different angles need to be stitched together to make the right call and I'm assuming that takes some amount of time. If they need 3 or 4 minutes to get all the evidence put together and reviewed so be it. Yes, it slows down the game but they need to make the right call. The decision making process and standards to for the call is what should be questioned and interrogated more than the length of the process.
|
But where do we draw the line here? I think we all accept that there will be varying degrees of missed calls/bad calls/borderline calls in every single game.
If the goal is to "get it right", then why are things so limited in what can be reviewed? 1 millimetre matters on offsides calls because the NHL says "it's either offside or it isn't. Then what about icing? What about a headbutt after the play that ends up with a 1 game suspension? Was there nobody watching a screen who could point out a very black/white dangerous play went unpenalized?
Maybe the goal should actually just be to "not get it totally wrong". Would last night's goal have been totally wrong to count? Of course not. Was Matt Duchene's offside goal that slightly expanded video review to new levels of inanity totally wrong? Yes.
All leagues struggle with video review killing the flow of the game. Only the NHL manages to kill the game while getting calls even more wrong.
Quote:
Originally Posted by PeteMoss
It was an absurd call but I think they are just bad at their job rather than biased.
The NFL actually did some fixing of their replays of late where they don't overturn it unless its obvious. That should be the NHL standard for judgement calls.
|
AFAIK that is the standard. Until it wasn't...