What if they use hawk-eye technology.... where they quickly display on the scoreboard the replay like they do in tennis.... with the words "onside" or "offside" - it's instant - and each team gets two (or a set number) per game (or period).... it takes NO time at all.... it's instant (5 seconds) - and remember, computer power is better then when this video was done.
Offside relies on two things, the position of the puck and the position of the player(s) (and the player's skate). That's where it becomes much more complicated.
Hawk-eye could help determine the position of the puck, but that's the easy part. Figuring out exactly where a player's skate blade was at that exact moment is where it becomes hard, especially when they've decided to get as ridiculous about it as they have.
The League could do many things to fix the problem with the offside reviews. They could rewrite the rule itself. They could change the review process, or they could change the standards used for the review. For some reason, they have decided not to do any of those things, yet.
__________________
Turn up the good, turn down the suck!
On the first - He was the only player inside the zone when the puck crossed the line. If he touched the blue line before any other attacking player entered the zone, then he's deemed to have tagged up and the play is onside. (This assumes the 'player leaving the ice' caveat doesn't negate the rest of the tag-up rule, but since the NHL didn't cite that in its review, I don't think it is applicable.)
On the second - for offside reviews, the linesmen review in concert with Toronto using the tablet. Same as the referees would on a goalie interference review.
The first isn't correct. If he tags up but then goes offside again before the puck goes in, he's offside. So is his toe goes across (the tag up), then goes back in (he goes offside again) and then the puck goes in, his first tagup doesn't matter and he's offside. It's only if the puck goes in and then he tags up after (and before anyone has control) that he's done it properly.
Offside relies on two things, the position of the puck and the position of the player(s) (and the player's skate). That's where it becomes much more complicated.
Hawk-eye could help determine the position of the puck, but that's the easy part. Figuring out exactly where a player's skate blade was at that exact moment is where it becomes hard, especially when they've decided to get as ridiculous about it as they have.
The League could do many things to fix the problem with the offside reviews. They could rewrite the rule itself. They could change the review process, or they could change the standards used for the review. For some reason, they have decided not to do any of those things, yet.
Solution: put Hawkeye on all the player's skates!
__________________
If you don't pass this sig to ten of your friends, you will become an Oilers fan.
The first isn't correct. If he tags up but then goes offside again before the puck goes in, he's offside. So is his toe goes across (the tag up), then goes back in (he goes offside again) and then the puck goes in, his first tagup doesn't matter and he's offside. It's only if the puck goes in and then he tags up after (and before anyone has control) that he's done it properly.
I agree. But that was my point in citing the image already posted in this thread: The puck is over the line at the same time that it *appears* Landeskog is touching the blue line. And in that scenario, he's onside.
You might look at the image and suggest that maybe Landeskog never touched the blue line so is offside, but it's not definitive in any way. As such, call on the ice should have stood.
I agree. But that was my point in citing the image already posted in this thread: The puck is over the line at the same time that it *appears* Landeskog is touching the blue line. And in that scenario, he's onside.
You might look at the image and suggest that maybe Landeskog never touched the blue line so is offside, but it's not definitive in any way. As such, call on the ice should have stood.
I don't think that's clear. But at the end of the day, Landeskog was not aware enough to even try to be onside, so I don't mind very much. Also, there were too many men (which, IMO is way more conducive to a review than offside), so I don't mind very much.
Hawk-eye could help determine the position of the puck, but that's the easy part. Figuring out exactly where a player's skate blade was at that exact moment is where it becomes hard, especially when they've decided to get as ridiculous about it as they have.
Actually.... Hawk-eye is more powerful today... They use it in a multitude of sports with different rules, and it's adapting... now hockey, we don't know, but why wouldn't we give it shot for offside calls and goal reviews.
In fact.... it's already installed in every NHL arena and the league is already getting this data, footage, and call. We fans just don't see it or know it.
2 at 
3 in regulation
must show all Flames games nationally when they play on Saturdays, Mondays, and Wednesdays !!!
