Terrible Calls by Officials thread

[You Need a Thneed]

Originally Posted by IamNotKenKing

Too lazy to read yesterday's thread, but yes it does. I can hang out in front of the opposition's net, and if the opposition passes the puck to me from outside the blue line, I am not offside.

Sorry, I didn't mean that it doesn't matter in all cases, I was only referring to this specific case.

The case you just described is allowed under the rules the way they are written, as the "player of the opposing team is in such defending zone" while the pass was made. Duchene was not, and thus doesn't apply for the exception.

[Super Nintendo Chalmers]

Originally Posted by You Need a Thneed

No, there are conditions given that must be met if the offside is to be ignored. Since one condition is not met (Duchene was not already in the zone), the offside cannot be ignored.

I can see that.

One question I have is, what constitutes playing the puck for this rule? In some situations, contact is all that is necessary (eg. nullifying an icing call). In others, clear possession is required (eg. delay of game, calling the play dead on a delayed penalty).

[corporatejay]

Originally Posted by You Need a Thneed

Sorry, I didn't mean that it doesn't matter in all cases, I was only referring to this specific case.

The case you just described is allowed under the rules the way they are written, as the "player of the opposing team is in such defending zone" while the pass was made. Duchene was not, and thus doesn't apply for the exception.

You are assuming "passes" means when the pass is initiated. I can see how there should be some interpretation to that rule, but when it comes to an experienced linesman and you, I'm going with the linesman.

[You Need a Thneed]

Originally Posted by Super Nintendo Chalmers

I can see that.

One question I have is, what constitutes playing the puck for this rule? In some situations, contact is all that is necessary (eg. nullifying an icing call). In others, clear possession is required (eg. delay of game, calling the play dead on a delayed penalty).

I think that's a gray area, as far as I can tell. The rule says "If a player legally carries or passes the puck back into his own defending zone"

I would read that as deflections wouldn't count as a carry or pass, especially since the very next paragraph talks about instances of deflections/rebounds. (however that paragraph doesn't apply to the Duchene goal scenario)

[AR_Six]

Originally Posted by Super Nintendo Chalmers

I can see that.

One question I have is, what constitutes playing the puck for this rule? In some situations, contact is all that is necessary (eg. nullifying an icing call). In others, clear possession is required (eg. delay of game, calling the play dead on a delayed penalty).

For me, "playing" the puck doesn't necessarily have to be clear possession, but it at least implies that what you're doing is deliberate. I.e. sliding to block a shot and then kicking the puck out of the zone doesn't necessarily connote possession imo, but you did play the puck out of the zone.

[gargamel]

Originally Posted by Super Nintendo Chalmers

I can see that.

One question I have is, what constitutes playing the puck for this rule? In some situations, contact is all that is necessary (eg. nullifying an icing call). In others, clear possession is required (eg. delay of game, calling the play dead on a delayed penalty).

Also, does "passes" only include the time when the puck is on the player's stick, or does it include the time that the puck is traveling until it hits someone else? Does anyone know how this rule has been interpreted in the past?

[puckluck2]

Originally Posted by You Need a Thneed

No, there are conditions given that must be met if the offside is to be ignored. Since one condition is not met (Duchene was not already in the zone), the offside cannot be ignored.

The line cannot be interpreted to mean anything else.

I'd argue in this case that neither of the conditions are met, as the puck was not passed or carried into the zone. Admittedly, if Nashville did touch the puck (did they?), that's much grayer.

We can see with video evidence that Duchene was not already inside the zone when the puck was allegedly "passed back into the zone".

Sorry, I think you're reading way too much into the words of the rule. I've played hockey and it has always been called that way.

What you're describing is how soccer calls their offsides not hockey. when a player passes has never been the deciding factor in an offside. It has always been where the puck is and where the skates are.

[You Need a Thneed]

Originally Posted by corporatejay

You are assuming "passes" means when the pass is initiated. I can see how there should be some interpretation to that rule, but when it comes to an experienced linesman and you, I'm going with the linesman.

Between an experienced linesman, and the official rulebook, I'm going with the rulebook every time.

How else could "passes the puck" be interpreted in this case other than a one sided event?

[Stay Golden]

Refs and linesman are not held accountable, like the NFL or even MLB where the league itself will say a mistake was made and the officials are actually rescheduled for doing a more prime time game to lesser one.
The NHL barely if ever admits to a poor decision by the refs.
In the NHL the refs especially are above the game and carry on like they are untouchable.
A growing number of them carry themselves during the games with pure arrogance.
Has the NHL even admitted that Karlsson their superstar young Norris trophy winner had his season ended because all 4 officials were not paying attention to the puck hitting the netting.
Funny how several players on the ice knew it did and pointed as soon as it happened.
Fact is the refs are unapproachable by players, coaches media when the refs are in the wrong.

[You Need a Thneed]

Originally Posted by puckluck2

Sorry, I think you're reading way too much into the words of the rule. I've played hockey and it has always been called that way.

What you're describing is how soccer calls their offsides not hockey. when a player passes has never been the deciding factor in an offside. It has always been where the puck is and where the skates are.

How can one possibly read too much into the words of an official rulebook? The exact wording IS the rules.

What you are saying, is that if you see that a puck has been deflected from the other zone, and is going to end up in your teams attacking zone, you don't have to wait for the puck to cross the blueline, you can just skate to a place in front of the goalie, and wait for the puck to come to you? I don't think I've ever seen that allowed, and I'm having a hard time thinking of any other instances similar to the Duchene one in the first place.

Normally, on similar plays the player is behind the play, but a pass back by the other team makes the puck reenter the zone. And there is very good rationelle for why the rule as written must be in place - as a team could waste quite a bit of time by forcing the other team into a position where they would have to clear the zone before they could attack the puck carrier.

That's what the exception is meant to cover, and it's very important to have that exception. However, that exception is clearly not meant to cover what happened in the Duchene play. There would be no logical reason for an exception for a player in Duchene's position. Having an exception for that might lead to a team taking advantage of the rule, and it isn't hard to think of how. If the Duchene play is legal, than it would also be legal to have a player already in the offensive zone when you are trying to gain the blue line, you would just have to deflect the puck off a defender's skate somehow to get the puck to him. I argue that that's the exact same thing as what happened in the Duchene play.

[GGG]

I think there are two separate issues in interpenting the rule in this case

Did the player pass the puck into the zone -> I think the answer to this is clearly no and the official said he originally thought the Nashville player passed the puck back but was wrong.

The second issue is does "while a player of the opposing team is in such
defending zone" mean when the puck is passed by the opposing player or any time that the pass is in flight? To me it should be interpeted as anytime the pass is in flight otherwise the official needs to be watching every player on the ice and not just make the ruling at the line. It becomes unmanagable and since it is such a rare occurance would be easy to miss.

So for me the interpetation of the player can enter the zone after the pass is started but before the puck enters the zone and still be onside is valid based on how the rule is written.

[Bring_Back_Shantz]

Originally Posted by Poe969

This isn't the first time there was a bad call, and it's not the worst....

That's the most ######ed thing I've ever seen.
That red line that's drawn on isn't anywhere close to where the goal line is.
Look at the top of the picutre, the real goal line is WAY further to the left.

[Jimmy Stang]

Originally Posted by Bring_Back_Shantz

That's the most ######ed thing I've ever seen.
That red line that's drawn on isn't anywhere close to where the goal line is.
Look at the top of the picutre, the real goal line is WAY further to the left.

I think that they were (poorly) trying to make a little magnification circle. Take a look at the little pygmy skating behind the net too.

[sameg]

From TSN

http://www.tsn.ca/blogs/kerry_fraser/?id=416368

[vektor]

can we get back to videos of bad calls?

[Hockeyguy15]

Originally Posted by Bring_Back_Shantz

That's the most ######ed thing I've ever seen.
That red line that's drawn on isn't anywhere close to where the goal line is.
Look at the top of the picutre, the real goal line is WAY further to the left.

The circle is zoomed in on that area, where the line is drawn is correct for the zoomed in portion.

The portion outside the circle is not zoomed in, hence why it does not line up with the zoomed in portion.

[valo403]

Originally Posted by corporatejay

You are assuming "passes" means when the pass is initiated. I can see how there should be some interpretation to that rule, but when it comes to an experienced linesman and you, I'm going with the linesman.

The linesman who admits he blew the call?

[valo403]

Originally Posted by puckluck2

Sorry, I think you're reading way too much into the words of the rule. I've played hockey and it has always been called that way.

What you're describing is how soccer calls their offsides not hockey. when a player passes has never been the deciding factor in an offside. It has always been where the puck is and where the skates are.

I'm not sure where you played, but every league I've played in has that play as offside every single time. You can't just leave out half a rule when interpreting it.

[clancy]

Originally Posted by Stay Golden

Refs and linesman are not held accountable, like the NFL or even MLB where the league itself will say a mistake was made and the officials are actually rescheduled for doing a more prime time game to lesser one.
The NHL barely if ever admits to a poor decision by the refs.
In the NHL the refs especially are above the game and carry on like they are untouchable.
A growing number of them carry themselves during the games with pure arrogance.
Has the NHL even admitted that Karlsson their superstar young Norris trophy winner had his season ended because all 4 officials were not paying attention to the puck hitting the netting.
Funny how several players on the ice knew it did and pointed as soon as it happened.
Fact is the refs are unapproachable by players, coaches media when the refs are in the wrong.

You are so wrong on so many counts. Not admitting publicly that they are wrong is not the same as being accountable. They are analyzed and rated after every game. Lower ratings mean no playoffs. Consistenlty low ratings mean no more job. unlike most of us, if our employer lets us go, we can find similar employment. Its not like these guys can go and ref in the NBA.

As for being unapproachable, not sure what you mean by that.Media of course. However, refs are always talking to coaches and players...during the games, on tv timeouts etc. In fact, right after the mistake yesterday, ref and lineman were over and taking a well deserved earful from Trotz.

Carrying themselves with arrogance? Quite frankly, since Mr Magoo, Frazer and Paul Stewart retired, I cant think of one ref in particular that thinks people are there to watch him.

At the end of the day, they do make mistakes, and they pay dearly for them.

[puckluck2]

Originally Posted by valo403

I'm not sure where you played, but every league I've played in has that play as offside every single time. You can't just leave out half a rule when interpreting it.

Has what play as offside?