[Rumour] McKenzie: Coach's challenge could be instituted next year

[sureLoss]

Bob McKenzie @TSNBobMcKenzie
If all goes as planned with NHL Competition Committee (today)/NHL GMs (Wed), Coach's Challenge is likely to be instituted next year, but...

Bob McKenzie @TSNBobMcKenzie
...But, at this point, subject to change, goalie interference calls would NOT be amongst criteria a coach could challenge via video review.

Bob McKenzie @TSNBobMcKenzie
Until Comp Committee and GMs beat this up, nothing is in final form but limited and very specific Coach's Challenge appears to be the plan.

[Coach]

I really don't understand keeping goalie interference out of the reviewable plays. It's arguably the most controversial/debated call and is the main reason for people wanting this rule. Just stupid and tells me that the NHL itself still has no idea what constitutes interference and what doesn't.

[Wood]

I'm good with having a challenge as long as it doesn't slow down the game too much

Can we challenge plays from 2004?

[_Q_]

I hate this.

In my opinion the worst thing about football is the overly technical aspect of the game. Human error is part of sport, that's one of the things that makes it exciting.

[nik-]

Originally Posted by Wood

I'm good with having a challenge as long as it doesn't slow down the game too much

Can we challenge plays from 2004?

Meh, even if it slows down the game a bit, watching hockey compared to the other big 4 sports is night and day.

If they get important calls right, then I'm all for it. 2 minute penalty if you lose your challenge. There will still be a huge chasm when compared to leagues like the NBA.

[undercoverbrother]

Originally Posted by _Q_

I hate this.

In my opinion the worst thing about football is the overly technical aspect of the game. Human error is part of sport, that's one of the things that makes it exciting.

I have no issue with the idea of it, but "the Devil in in the details". How will it be implemented.


I reckon, there should be a limit to the number of times a coach can challenge, and have a penalty of some kind for a failed challenge.


I do agree with you that there can be too much review in a sport, and it takes away the spontaneity of the game.

[Erick Estrada]

Originally Posted by _Q_

I hate this.

In my opinion the worst thing about football is the overly technical aspect of the game. Human error is part of sport, that's one of the things that makes it exciting.

I don't know. I kind if hate how the Kings won game two despite scoring a goal by impairing the goaltender's ability to make a save on the shot. These two teams have played 80+ games to get to this point where they need 4 more wins for the cup and it's a crummy way to have an opponent get a win in a game where they may not have deserved it.

[Coach]

Originally Posted by undercoverbrother

I have no issue with the idea of it, but "the Devil in in the details". How will it be implemented.


I reckon, there should be a limit to the number of times a coach can challenge, and have a penalty of some kind for a failed challenge.


I do agree with you that there can be too much review in a sport, and it takes away the spontaneity of the game.

I think it would be 1 challenge per game. Either lose your time out or a delay of game penalty if wrong. Must be challenged at the next play stoppage otherwise it's too late.

[_Q_]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

I don't know. I kind if hate how the Kings won game two despite scoring a goal by impairing the goaltender's ability to make a save on the shot. These two teams have played 80+ games to get to this point where they need 4 more wins for the cup and it's a crummy way to have an opponent get a win in a game where they may not have deserved it.

Sure I get the other side of it. You want to ensure that the correct call is made, etc.

But to me, nothing is more lame than watching a football game and then going through 10 minutes of replays every quarter and having to listen to the announcers go "see what they're looking at right now is if both feet were in bounds while he catches the ball... Well in this angle it looks as though it's a good catch Johnny, but boy this will be a tough one to make." Makes me want to shoot myself in the face.

Can you imagine having to go through that crap 3 times per period over a missed icing or offside call. Part of the excitement of the game is thinking you know better than the officials.

[saillias]

I still remember the goal Jovo "scored" on Kipper in the 2004 playoffs. Complete garbage, he knocks him over with no other Flame nearby and puts the puck in.

[GirlySports]

Originally Posted by MattyC

I really don't understand keeping goalie interference out of the reviewable plays. It's arguably the most controversial/debated call and is the main reason for people wanting this rule. Just stupid and tells me that the NHL itself still has no idea what constitutes interference and what doesn't.

I think this is why. You can't make judgement calls based on video review. Instead of a judgement call by the refs it becomes a judgement call by 3 guys in Toronto.

I think offsides would be the big one that a coach could challenge. Another could be puck over the glass, if it hit a stick or the glass or not.

Icing would be ridiculous, imagine if it should have been icing but was waved off, play continues for a minute+ and someone scores. Then there is a challenge and it really was icing cause the defenseman was an inch ahead at the faceoff dot so the goal was waived off and the faceoff goes back and you can't change players after there have already been line changes.. what a mess.

[ForeverFlameFan]

http://www.nhl.com/gamecenter/en/recap?id=2013020728

Probably one game that really pushed the vote for the coaches' challenge.

[Coach]

Originally Posted by _Q_

Sure I get the other side of it. You want to ensure that the correct call is made, etc.

But to me, nothing is more lame than watching a football game and then going through 10 minutes of replays every quarter and having to listen to the announcers go "see what they're looking at right now is if both feet were in bounds while he catches the ball... Well in this angle it looks as though it's a good catch Johnny, but boy this will be a tough one to make." Makes me want to shoot myself in the face.

Can you imagine having to go through that crap 3 times per period over a missed icing or offside call. Part of the excitement of the game is thinking you know better than the officials.

Again, talk from day one is that there will only be one allowed per game. With that and the single timeout each team gets, its a far cry from the 3 TO's and 2 Challenges that NFL coaches get in each HALF. Also not to mention the game of hockey moves a billion times faster than football in the first place.

I doubt people would notice much of a difference between icing calls and TV timeouts and their review of every goal in the playoffs anyways.

[Coach]

Originally Posted by GirlySports

I think this is why. You can't make judgement calls based on video review. Instead of a judgement call by the refs it becomes a judgement call by 3 guys in Toronto.

I think offsides would be the big one that a coach could challenge. Another could be puck over the glass, if it hit a stick or the glass or not.

Icing would be ridiculous, imagine if it should have been icing but was waved off, play continues for a minute+ and someone scores. Then there is a challenge and it really was icing cause the defenseman was an inch ahead at the faceoff dot so the goal was waived off and the faceoff goes back and you can't change players after there have already been line changes.. what a mess.

It doesn't need to be a judgement call. Did a player prevent the goalie from moving within the crease? Interference.

Your second point is a good one though. What happens if an offside is missed, a team scores and then it is reviewed? Does the clock get turned back and anything that happened during the rest of the play get nixed (goals, penalties, etc..)?

[Barbecue]

Originally Posted by _Q_

Human error is part of sport, that's one of the things that makes it exciting.

I've never understood this argument.

Every single time there's a miscall, there's always been frustration with the ref.

When, in the history of all of sports, has there ever been a fan that said "Great error on your part Ref! That made the game super exciting!"?

[Bandwagon In Flames]

I think the pros far outweigh the cons in this case. Games running a bit longer is the only real downside (unless your the Canucks and now have to re-strategize your entire game). Even then, I'm sure something can be worked out with the network to have a commercial break during reviews and take out a T.V timeout.

A rule like this can drastically reduce the amount of diving and embellishments in the NHL. If you don't like the sounds of that, then I suspect you are Alex Burrows.

[Jacks]

Originally Posted by MattyC

I think it would be 1 challenge per game. Either lose your time out or a delay of game penalty if wrong. Must be challenged at the next play stoppage otherwise it's too late.

I like this idea, if you don't have a time out to forfeit then you get a delay penalty. You're not going to have a bunch of iffy challenges if they might give up a powerplay. I wouldn't mind even 2 or 3 challenges under that system.

There should be no review on icing.

[undercoverbrother]

Originally Posted by Bandwagon In Flames

I think the pros far outweigh the cons in this case. Games running a bit longer is the only real downside (unless your the Canucks and now have to re-strategize your entire game). Even then, I'm sure something can be worked out with the network to have a commercial break during reviews and take out a T.V timeout.

A rule like this can drastically reduce the amount of diving and embellishments in the NHL. If you don't like the sounds of that, then I suspect you are Alex Burrows.

I don't suspect that they will be allowed to challenge something like a minor, ie: tripping v diving.

[Erick Estrada]

Not sure if it's just me but I have found the linesmen in the playoffs to have made numerous poor offside calls where the puck never crossed the line into the neutral zone and they call it offside. Now there's typically no point in challenging that call because the play is immediately whistled but with say 10 seconds left in a game and the net empty if you win the challenge you could have the faceoff at least moved into the opponents zone instead of the neutral zone dot. I think with the HD cameras we should be able to get calls right that depend on crossing lines.

[Coach]

Originally Posted by undercoverbrother

I don't suspect that they will be allowed to challenge something like a minor, ie: tripping v diving.

This is one of the main things i would like to see it used for. Blatant dives where the penalized player didn't even touch the opposing player could easily be curbed with this. Sadly, not using the challenge for diving or goalie interference pretty much negates almost all of it's benefit. How often does a blown offside really happen? Much less than the other two, I would think.