New Offside Rule: F/A - Calgarypuck Forums - The Unofficial Calgary Flames Fan Community

calgarywinning · 02-08-2017, 11:51 PM

How is everybody enjoying the new offside rule?

They were discussing on Sportsnet tonight.

As they said, it was the only game so this is the only thing to discuss.

Wild goal was clearly offside, they couldn't connect to head office. They had to use a cellphone. Came back as onside. Took 9 minutes.

The ruling is if it's non-conclusive the ruling on the ice stands. Which in this case was a goal.

My complaint to date is that it takes too long after play has transpired for the calls, can be several minutes.

Secondly, Glen Gulutzan can't nail one in our favour.

For or Against?

Major Major · 02-09-2017, 12:30 AM

I think linesmen should aloud to look at the play once at game speed. If it's obviously offside, they'll notice and it will get rid of the strange calls you'd get once in a while that was offside by 6 feet. If they can't tell, call on ice stands as it is in the ball park of onside, which is more in the intention of the rule I think than trying to determine if a toe lifted in freeze frame.

calgarywinning · 02-09-2017, 12:39 AM

I just thought it would be interesting, if one could to go back over the years of "offside" under video review goals to adjust player stats as needed.

Wonder how many players got the goal before pre-video review and would skate to their line mate and say .... we were totally offside.

Hey Connor, It's Mess · 02-09-2017, 12:40 AM

If they're going to slow the game down with challenges and the subsequent "objective" reviews, they sure as hell shouldn't be screwing up obvious ones like tonight's.

FireGilbert · 02-09-2017, 01:21 AM

Don't we already have a thread for this? Pretty sure I bumped it after the most recent Flames disallowed goal.

I've said many times I'm against it. If they are going to keep it get rid of the linesmen all together and review every goal for offside. Refs can drop pucks and call icings with two bouncers off ice to break up fights.

dobbles · 02-09-2017, 10:14 AM

OT: anyone care to describe positives to having offsides in the first place? The only thing I can think of is slowing down the game which helps reduce risk and injuries.

Overall though I feel like the game would be better without it.

REDVAN · 02-09-2017, 10:59 AM

They were arguing this on the Flames broadcast a few weeks ago while waiting for the coach's challenge.

My personal opinion is that the blueline should be a "plane" the same way the goal line is a plane. If your skate is off the ice, but you're in the blueline plane, you're good.

If it's a challengable call, then it has to be a black and white rule. I just think it should be a plane rather than a line.

And I think failed challenges should result in a delay of game penalty, and not the loss of a timeout.

AC · 02-09-2017, 11:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by REDVAN

And I think failed challenges should result in a delay of game penalty, and not the loss of a timeout.

The problem with this is it relies on the reviews being accurate. During the ridiculous review last night, can you imagine if they not only inexplicably ruled the Minnesota goal onside but also gave Chicago a penalty despite it clearly being offside?

VilleN · 02-09-2017, 02:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dobbles

OT: anyone care to describe positives to having offsides in the first place? The only thing I can think of is slowing down the game which helps reduce risk and injuries.

Overall though I feel like the game would be better without it.

Is this serious? I feel like it can't be... It would be total chaos without offsides.

northcrunk · 02-09-2017, 02:07 PM

It might make the game more interesting without offsides. Imagine having a guy cherry pick in front of the net all game. It could be a rover position.

taxbuster · 02-09-2017, 06:56 PM

I'm a "game speed" guy - if the linesmen review it and it looks offside at game speed - go for it and call it as you see it.

If they need 27 cameras, 10 minutes and 53 blown-up images....maybe they've gone just a bit too far?

taxbuster · 02-09-2017, 06:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by northcrunk

It might make the game more interesting without offsides. Imagine having a guy cherry pick in front of the net all game. It could be a rover position.

I think we called that "goal suck" when I was a kid. (Admittedly rather a lengthy time ago....)

Cleveland Steam Whistle · 02-09-2017, 07:38 PM

It's a lot of effort and damages my enjoyment of the game just to get at best a couple of meaningful and impacting offside calls leading to goals that the linesmen miss right a season.

Not worth it, more than happy to live with the human error on the ice.

1Nite · 02-09-2017, 09:46 PM

How would having a thinner blue line work?

JohnnyTitan · 02-09-2017, 10:12 PM

Or a thicker blue line?

GioforPM · 02-10-2017, 07:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JohnnyTitan

Or a thicker blue line?

Sutter always advocated this. He figured it would lead to less offsides, more offensive zone time.

REDVAN · 02-10-2017, 08:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AC

The problem with this is it relies on the reviews being accurate. During the ridiculous review last night, can you imagine if they not only inexplicably ruled the Minnesota goal onside but also gave Chicago a penalty despite it clearly being offside?

Yeah well that would certainly cut down on frivolous challenges then.

And they can get it accurate if they want to. I think it's easier to determine if something has crossed a plane than whether it's touching line. IF the camera is straight on the plane that is.

Bill Bumface · 02-10-2017, 11:19 AM

How about if the linesman or any official is concerned they got it wrong (obstructed view, the other officials saw something) then they can review it.

Otherwise let the guys that are paid $200k a year because they are the best in the world at watching pucks cross lines be the authority on the subject until we replace them with technology that can make the calls with perfect accuracy in real time.

dobbles · 02-10-2017, 12:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by VilleN

Is this serious? I feel like it can't be... It would be total chaos without offsides.

Totally serious. How would it be chaotic? I think it would lead to more offense. Right now defensively you just protect the blue line and cause boring dump and chase with limited offensive opportunity.

I can't remember exactly where I saw it but I think it was a documentary about Slava Fetisov and he said when he came over he was shocked that coaches and players were satisfied by simply gaining the blue line and dumping it in even if there was no chacne for a scoring opportunity.

That's when it really sunk in for me... We aren't watching a sport that is about goals and excitement. We now watchoose a sport that's about playing it safe and not screwing up. It's lame.

GioforPM · 02-10-2017, 01:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dobbles

Totally serious. How would it be chaotic? I think it would lead to more offense. Right now defensively you just protect the blue line and cause boring dump and chase with limited offensive opportunity.

I can't remember exactly where I saw it but I think it was a documentary about Slava Fetisov and he said when he came over he was shocked that coaches and players were satisfied by simply gaining the blue line and dumping it in even if there was no chacne for a scoring opportunity.

That's when it really sunk in for me... We aren't watching a sport that is about goals and excitement. We now watchoose a sport that's about playing it safe and not screwing up. It's lame.

It sounds ridiculous at first but then again basketball does it.