GM Meetings: NHL to amend offside rule? "breaking the plane"

[PsYcNeT]

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by DeluxeMoustache

I’m on the other side here. Probably would like to see how many calls are actually overturned before even beginning to consider this

Maybe you could get them to agree to be paid less if you are reducing their decision making ability

Calling off a goal after looking at two or three shots 5 times each is fine.

Calling off a goal based on eye sight in a fast moving goal sucks when the tie goes to the call on the ice, and the goal would have stood if they hadn't signalled no goal.

[Oil Stain]

Originally Posted by 81MC

The thing with the plane concept that I don’t like: skates in the air. You want those really sharp objects on the ground as much as possible, not incentivizing sticking it out as far as possible.
I doubt anything would happen. But skates being suck out at as close to hip level as possible to stay onside seems like a bad idea to me.

You foresee players are going to be crossing the blueline like this in the future?



I don't think it'll happen. There isn't really any benefit to sticking your leg higher when dragging it to stay onside.

[JackIsBack]

Originally Posted by dissentowner

No, no they don't. We see it time and again an official staring right at the infraction and no call or they make a weak one. The game is not called by infractions, it is dictated by game management and until that changes the product will continue to be frustrating to watch.

I totally agree with you. A penalty is penalty no matter when it occurs in a game, or a season, or a playoff run. This whole nonsensical argument of "not wanting to effect the outcome of a game by a penalty call" the so called "putting the whistles away" is actually doing exactly the opposite, it is effecting the game, because according to the rules an infraction was made and wasn't NOT called in one instance or another and called other times. The player knew it was an infraction and got away with it during the "whistles away" time. This always effects the game during the playoffs.... if a team is built on highly skilled players and dominates during the regular season when more penalties are drawn by their players... a team that barely squeaks in the playoffs that's built on more toughness and brute force and interfering with those skilled players can win and knock good teams out because the same infractions aren't called consistently.


The other thing they need to call more often is diving.... and don't take both players off (because that doesn't punish the diver at all) - only the diver or cheater goes. Cheating should be a penalty - and a big one... for example, if not during the attempted save, a goalie knowingly tries to slide the puck out of the net while concealing it by slowly sliding his glove or pad where the puck is in or under out of the net and this is revealed by the referee or during a replay review... the goal counts and penalty is assessed for unsportsmanlike conduct.

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by GirlySports

Once replay is brought in it has to be by the mm. That's why people are against it.

Say you look at it once and confirm the call. All the telecasts will find other angles and if you're wrong you're in trouble.

It has to be all or nothing.

Of course it doesn't have to be "all or nothing". That's just a ridiculous false dichotomy.

What it comes down to is what level of imperfection you are willing to accept. Because the simple fact is, we will never have perfection in officiating.

So you choose to accept that video replay is only for overturning blatantly obvious errors - which was the original intent and which does not require more than a single replay to determine. Once it's close enough that you need multiple angles and multiple looks, then you accept that that is just part of the normal variance of human limitations.

For things like offside calls or pucks hitting the netting, we shouldn't even be having participants asking for or making the review. All you need is a couple of off-ice officials watching the broadcast who can signal an on-ice official to stop play if they detect an obvious error. Otherwise, you just let play go.

[Mass_nerder]

Originally Posted by Hemi-Cuda

I wish they'd go further. A player entering the zone a fraction of a second ahead of the puck doesn't make a realistic difference in the play, and all the rule does is slow down the game. I'm not sure they even need the offside rule, would teams really put a cherry picker in the offensive zone and give the other team a 5-on-4? If you must have offsides, then put a timer on it. If a player enters the zone within 1 second of the puck, then it doesn't matter who was first

I agree that in general it doesn't really affect the play, but the problem then becomes how you draw the line to decide the amount a player can be offside before it does start affecting the play?

[rayne008]

I like the updated offside rule, although I think the maximum amount the skate blade can be above the ice is the height of the yellow border at the bottom of the boards, I'm guessing 8".

IMO this image below should not be offside.

If someone is crushed up against the boards and their trailing skate is above the yellow border, offside.

I think they can write is in such a way to allow for a very brief review if necessary.

[FanIn80]

Originally Posted by SuperMatt18

Other rules they should change:

1) You still get the PP if you don't score on the penalty shot.

The penalty shot should be treated the same as a delayed penalty call to me. The penalty shot replaces the chance that was eliminated by the penalty, if you don't score you still get the 2 minute PP just like if a normal penalty was called on the play instead.

2) Align the rules of the blue line on what is considered in/out of the zone.

When entering the zone the puck needs to be considered completely over the blue line to be in the zone, but when exiting the zone the puck needs to completely exit the blue line to be considered out. So in the two situations the way the "blue ice" is handled is different. They should make it the same, and once the puck hits the blue ice it should be considered in the zone, just like it's considered in the zone still as long as it's on the blue ice once already entered.

Agree with both, but if they aren't willing to go all the way with #1 then at least allow teams the option to choose who takes the penalty shot.

[Scroopy Noopers]

Originally Posted by Oil Stain

You foresee players are going to be crossing the blueline like this in the future?



I don't think it'll happen. There isn't really any benefit to sticking your leg higher when dragging it to stay onside.

Exactly. The whole reason players are offside is they are coming in with speed. They will continue to do the same leg drag as always, as it’s the easiest to do without losing too much speed while remaining ready for a pass.

[FanIn80]

Originally Posted by Oil Stain

You foresee players are going to be crossing the blueline like this in the future?

Actual in-game footage of Alex Burrows crossing the blueline.

[GGG]

Originally Posted by dissentowner

No, no they don't. We see it time and again an official staring right at the infraction and no call or they make a weak one. The game is not called by infractions, it is dictated by game management and until that changes the product will continue to be frustrating to watch.

What you are actually saying then in the Refs are very good at their jobs.

They just have been given the wrong directives.

[MrMike]

Originally Posted by Red_Baron

Maybe award a penalty shot for any infraction in the defensive zone with less than 10 seconds left on the clock? That would make for a pretty strong deterrent.

Could you imagine how bad referees would try and control games that way? Just imagine the Oilers with 3 penalty shots in the last ten seconds of a game.

[Resolute 14]

It would be the opposite. Those last seconds would become a literal free for all as the officials call nothing for fear of "deciding the outcome".

[MrMike]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

It would be the opposite. Those last seconds would become a literal free for all as the officials call nothing for fear of "deciding the outcome".

Not the games I’ve been watching. I swear most refs have wagers on their games.

[GirlySports]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

Of course it doesn't have to be "all or nothing". That's just a ridiculous false dichotomy.

What it comes down to is what level of imperfection you are willing to accept. Because the simple fact is, we will never have perfection in officiating.

So you choose to accept that video replay is only for overturning blatantly obvious errors - which was the original intent and which does not require more than a single replay to determine. Once it's close enough that you need multiple angles and multiple looks, then you accept that that is just part of the normal variance of human limitations.

For things like offside calls or pucks hitting the netting, we shouldn't even be having participants asking for or making the review. All you need is a couple of off-ice officials watching the broadcast who can signal an on-ice official to stop play if they detect an obvious error. Otherwise, you just let play go.

I agree with you. But the media will make the controversy and the aggrieved fans will go nuts.

Its the let it go crowd against the get it right crowd.

[dissentowner]

Originally Posted by GGG

What you are actually saying then in the Refs are very good at their jobs.

They just have been given the wrong directives.

I think it is a little of both to be honest. Although I would love to know if that is the real issue with officials looking incompetent night in and out. Maybe the game management is a lot more severe than we think. Something is definitely off with the number of obvious calls missed and the amount of soft/ghost calls made though.