[News] New rule adds pressure on NHL coaches asking for offside challenge

[Lubicon]

Can't argue with all three of the rule changes but would like to see a couple of them go a little further:

• change the offside rule to allow for a skate to be above the plane of the blue line rather than having to be on the ice. Similar to how football. No more having to decide if the skate blade was on or off the ice when the puck crossed the blue line, only was the skate on or above the line.
• teams will now adapt to the no time out after icing by causing more delays on the face off. Line up infractions, centre gettign tossed etc. Anythign to get a few more seconds of rest. The NHL needs to find a way to prevent this. Maybe a little stricter on the delay of game calls when this happens?

[FireGilbert]

I'm not sure how I feel on this one. On one hand it will eliminate the reviews on very close calls but on the other hand it is going to doubly screw over teams when inevitably the video review on the tablet still results in the wrong call.

I'm not a fan of the challenge system anyways. I would prefer if there was an off ice video official who notified the refs of any questionable calls, including goals and penalties, then the on ice officials would watch the replay on the jumbo tron to decide on confirming or overruling their original call. It's not perfect but is at least transparent and would result in less incorrect calls.

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by Lubicon

Can't argue with all three of the rule changes but would like to see a couple of them go a little further:

• change the offside rule to allow for a skate to be above the plane of the blue line rather than having to be on the ice. Similar to how football. No more having to decide if the skate blade was on or off the ice when the puck crossed the blue line, only was the skate on or above the line.
• teams will now adapt to the no time out after icing by causing more delays on the face off. Line up infractions, centre gettign tossed etc. Anythign to get a few more seconds of rest. The NHL needs to find a way to prevent this. Maybe a little stricter on the delay of game calls when this happens?

They actually changed the rule on the centre getting tossed last year. Following an icing, if there is a violation, the linesman will just signal instead of tossing the centre. He has to stay at the circle and be ready for an immediate faceoff. Second infraction is the same delay of game penalty. This both tries to limit the delaying tactics you mention, and it stops coaches from putting a winger in to deliberately commit a violation to get tossed before the centre goes in.

[Robbob]

Originally Posted by FireGilbert

I'm not sure how I feel on this one. On one hand it will eliminate the reviews on very close calls but on the other hand it is going to doubly screw over teams when inevitably the video review on the tablet still results in the wrong call.

I'm not a fan of the challenge system anyways. I would prefer if there was an off ice video official who notified the refs of any questionable calls, including goals and penalties, then the on ice officials would watch the replay on the jumbo tron to decide on confirming or overruling their original call. It's not perfect but is at least transparent and would result in less incorrect calls.

The spirit of the offside was to curtail the egregious offside like the Duchene a few years back. I think this works now.

[Geeoff]

Originally Posted by wireframe

This isn't good for Gulutzan and the Flames.

That depends. It feels like the Flames got a goal taken back by offside review in every other game last year. (probably hyperbole?)

[AC]

The biggest issue with the goalie interference challenge is they're forcing the refs who made the on-ice call to admit they were wrong during the process. It inevitably leads to bias.

Whereas if they just went to Toronto for those reviews then it should solve that issue.

[H2SO4(aq)]

An improvement on their mistake. This is the worst rule change they ever made, actually hurts the game. Atleast they will make coaches think twice but overtime playoffs we will see the same challenge bs

[FireGilbert]

Originally Posted by Robbob

The spirit of the offside was to curtail the egregious offside like the Duchene a few years back. I think this works now.

Agreed it was implemented to catch obvious missed offsides resulting in goals however morphed into a coaches Hail Mary. I think having an off ice official informing the refs would work better than a challenge though. Another benifit of this is that more calls are correct and you don't get situations where a team loses their challenge on interference and can no longer challenge the egregious offside later in the game.

[Enoch Root]

nm

[Oil Stain]

Originally Posted by Lubicon

Can't argue with all three of the rule changes but would like to see a couple of them go a little further:

• change the offside rule to allow for a skate to be above the plane of the blue line rather than having to be on the ice. Similar to how football. No more having to decide if the skate blade was on or off the ice when the puck crossed the blue line, only was the skate on or above the line.
• teams will now adapt to the no time out after icing by causing more delays on the face off. Line up infractions, centre gettign tossed etc. Anythign to get a few more seconds of rest. The NHL needs to find a way to prevent this. Maybe a little stricter on the delay of game calls when this happens?

I agree with both of these.

Plane of the blueline makes way more sense than having to keep your skate on the ice. Especially when they are trying to decide if a skate is 1/4 inch off the ice.

[getbak]

Originally Posted by H2SO4(aq)

An improvement on their mistake. This is the worst rule change they ever made, actually hurts the game. Atleast they will make coaches think twice but overtime playoffs we will see the same challenge bs

In the last minute of regulation and OT any challenges are made by the Situation Room.

[Erick Estrada]

I'm fine with this. If it's an obvious bad call the coach will be able to see it on the iPad and take the risk. If it's one of those that there's desperation to get a goal called back on a puck that's so close that they are hoping for a coin flip decision going their way then by all means flip the coin. If you pick heads and the command center gets tails then you compound the issue of the goal counting and being shorthanded immediately after.

[TheIronMaiden]

Originally Posted by Oil Stain

I agree with both of these.

Plane of the blueline makes way more sense than having to keep your skate on the ice. Especially when they are trying to decide if a skate is 1/4 inch off the ice.

My guess is that this will come soon. If reducing downtime is what the NHL wants this will certainly be tabled next GM meeting.

[robaur]

I don't get the referees on the ice reviewing some of these calls. Can anyone explain that to me? Why can't all the reviews go through the situation room like they do in the NBA, NFL, and MLB? NHL is the only league that lets the referees make the final decision on the review of a call that they might have made a mistake on. That is just an inefficient control.

[dissentowner]

You know what else would speed the game up a lot? If the zebra dropping the puck doesn't decide to redo it 3-4 times every faceoff. This was never an issue until the past few seasons, now it is ridiculous.

[united]

Just get rid of the timeout all together.

[FBI]

We are going to be PISSED in the game threads when we get this challenge wrong heh

[transplant99]

Originally Posted by dissentowner

You know what else would speed the game up a lot? If the zebra dropping the puck doesn't decide to redo it 3-4 times every faceoff. This was never an issue until the past few seasons, now it is ridiculous.

That has been going on, literally, for decades.

[squiggs96]

Originally Posted by Insane_Flame

You need a two week ban for getting the thread off topic. At least that is how I understand the rules. And to say that whole situation didn't contribute to the Flames being on the unfair end of calls more often than not would be ignorant.

So, in a thread that has nothing to do with Wideman, you bring up Wideman. I make a moderately funny joke to try and stop further talk of Wideman. You get easily offended, and further push the narrative of Wideman affecting calls, which has the potential to restart the debate. This, once again, in a thread that has nothing to do with Wideman.

But I'm the one for getting the thread off topic? Okay, champ.

[s_procee]

a great tweak to the rule