sabresouth Posted November 29, 2015 Report Share Posted November 29, 2015 OK, this is my first go at starting a thread, so here it goes. I put this in the game day thread but thought it might make a good topic. I think losing the challenge kills a team. I've only watched Sabres game's and of the four challenges made the team that lost the challenge lost the game. All of a sudden offsides and other calls are having more of an effect on games than they should. Does anybody know what the win loss record is for team's that lose the challenge? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Weave Posted November 29, 2015 Report Share Posted November 29, 2015 Bust a deal, spin the wheel. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LGR4GM Posted November 29, 2015 Report Share Posted November 29, 2015 Bartertown aside, it would be interesting to see the results of challenge losers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darksabre Posted November 29, 2015 Report Share Posted November 29, 2015 Bust a deal, spin the wheel. Thank you :lol: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sabresouth Posted November 30, 2015 Author Report Share Posted November 30, 2015 I would bet teams that have a goal taken away lose 80% of those games. Teams who challenge to get a goal added (like the preds game) may be 50-50. I just believe that an offsides is now a game changer and I don't like it. That's not what the rule was for, but that is the unintended consequences. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LGR4GM Posted November 30, 2015 Report Share Posted November 30, 2015 I would bet teams that have a goal taken away lose 80% of those games. Teams who challenge to get a goal added (like the preds game) may be 50-50. I just believe that an offsides is now a game changer and I don't like it. That's not what the rule was for, but that is the unintended consequences. Exactly. It wasn't meant to be a nitpicky well he was in the zone a hair before the puck it was to stop guys from camping in the zone and to help the defense. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sabresouth Posted November 30, 2015 Author Report Share Posted November 30, 2015 I hope they do away with the challenge, but I'm not holding my breath. I at least hope they will modify it so that lesser calls aren't game changers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doohickie Posted November 30, 2015 Report Share Posted November 30, 2015 I think it might help if they put a time limit on it. So if a team enters on an offside that isn't caught, but controls the puck for, say, 20 or 30 seconds, before scoring, the entry could not be challenged. The point of offsides is to keep offensive players from hanging out by the goal looking for the breakaway pass. If a team enters on a close, but offiside, play, and scores on the rush, that should be reviewable. But if the puck is in the zone long enough for the defense to recover, they should play on. The hard part is determining how many seconds that should be. 5? 30? I guess we'd have to watch some game film to call it. Or maybe they call it based on the play- once the initial rush is over (as determined by the ref or Toronto), and errand offside call cannot be used to overturn a goal. By the way, I think there should be NO reviews at ice level. If it's going to be reviewed, let Toronto do all of them. My reasons for this are: The review is made by an unbiased neutral party (most referees would probably not want to overturn a called made my them or their crew), the league offices can use the highest definition equipment and views available, and the league office can be said to be the final arbiter of all calls, period. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Courier-Express Posted November 30, 2015 Report Share Posted November 30, 2015 I think challenges should be made without communication to the bench. Coaches should make a decision based in "the moment" not after a video coach reviews for you. This would stop a lot of this mess. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doohickie Posted November 30, 2015 Report Share Posted November 30, 2015 I think challenges should be made without communication to the bench. Coaches should make a decision based in "the moment" not after a video coach reviews for you. This would stop a lot of this mess. Not sure about that. Having someone able to view the video ahead of making the challenge screens out most of the iffy calls. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Courier-Express Posted November 30, 2015 Report Share Posted November 30, 2015 (edited) I just don't like all the delays. Same rules apply. If you're wrong you lose your timeout and may not challenge again. Edited November 30, 2015 by COURIER-EXPRESS Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Radar Posted November 30, 2015 Report Share Posted November 30, 2015 Please no challenges. Hate them really in any sport. Let the officials make the calls or not make them. Worked for years. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PASabreFan Posted November 30, 2015 Report Share Posted November 30, 2015 Not sure about that. Having someone able to view the video ahead of making the challenge screens out most of the iffy calls. We haven't heard too much about the actual procedure. Who is upstairs looking at video and advising the coaches? I also wonder what video capabilities they have. Can they look at a replay while play is ongoing or do they have to wait like the rest of us? Does the league ensure that both teams have access to the same video? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Courier-Express Posted November 30, 2015 Report Share Posted November 30, 2015 I guess I got the impression someone was checking video prior to a challenge during the Nashville game. One of the announcers made mention Phil Housley was talking to his tie prior to their challenge. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sabresouth Posted November 30, 2015 Author Report Share Posted November 30, 2015 I like the time limit idea or only review if the player that was offsides scoes or makes the primary assist within a time limit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattPie Posted December 1, 2015 Report Share Posted December 1, 2015 I would bet teams that have a goal taken away lose 80% of those games. Teams who challenge to get a goal added (like the preds game) may be 50-50. I just believe that an offsides is now a game changer and I don't like it. That's not what the rule was for, but that is the unintended consequences. With 3-4 goals being scored per game, total, if you take one away from a team that's 33-50% of that teams expected goal production for the game. That's probably more of the issue than "momentum". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain Caveman Posted December 1, 2015 Report Share Posted December 1, 2015 Bust a deal, spin the wheel. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sabresouth Posted December 2, 2015 Author Report Share Posted December 2, 2015 I think between the loss of a goal and the loss of momentum,that put's your team in a deeper hole than before they scored. The odds get smaller every time you have to come from behind in a game. Of course not all challenges are made coming from behind, some keep a team from going up two goals and thus would have less of an effect on the outcome of the game. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sabresouth Posted December 5, 2015 Author Report Share Posted December 5, 2015 I am going to take this opportunity to state again my opposition to the challenge,even though we won it last night in the Arizona game. For the sake of argument I'm going to say there was no golie interference. My problem is that the high sticking call wasn't reviewable on the goal. A player being a couple of inches offsides is minimal to a goal being scored compared to a player being taken out of the play (in this case a high stick not being called). Correct me if I'm wrong, but the high sticking call would have been the highest percentage to overturn rather than the golie interference. It was the most obvious and easily seen on replay. Hence my assumption that the high sticking call wasn't reviewable. This is my problem with the challenge. They need to do away with it completely. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hoss Posted December 5, 2015 Report Share Posted December 5, 2015 (edited) Teams that lose a challenge are 16-21-6 - on pace for a 72-point season Teams that win a challenge are 10-9-2 - on pace for an 85-point season Teams that benefit from a challenge (they won or other team lost) are 37-25-2 - on pace for a 97-point season Teams that are hurt from a challenge (they lost the challenge or other team won) are 27-31-6 - on pace for a 77-point season All data taken from here: http://www.nhl.com/ice/blog.htm?id=4505 12/4 Boston challenged Calgary goal for goalie interference - they lost the challenge and the game (OT) 12/4 Buffalo challenged Arizona goal for goalie interference - they won the challenge and the game 12/3 Vancouver challenged Dallas goal for offsides - they lost the challenge and the game 12/3 Minnesota challenged Toronto goal for offsides - they won the challenge and the game 12/3 Detroit challenged Arizona goal for offsides - they won the challenge and the game 12/2 Tampa challenged Anaheim goal for goalie interference - they lost the challenge but won the game 12/2 Winnipeg challenged Toronto goal for goalie interference - they won the challenge and the game 12/1 San Jose challenged their no-goal vs Pittsburgh for goalie interference - they lost the challenge and the game 11/29 Florida challenged their no-goal vs Detroit for goalie interference - they lost the challenge but won the game 11/28 Nashville challenged their no-goal vs Buffalo for goalie interference - they lost the challenge and the game 11/28 Arizona challenged Ottawa goal for goalie interference - they lost the challenge but won the game 11/27 Pittsburgh challenged Columbus goal for goalie interference - they lost the challenge and the game (OT) 11/27 Edmonton challenged Detroit goal for goalie interference - they lost the challenge and the game (OT) 11/23 Buffalo challenged St. Louis goal for offsides - they lost the challenge and the game 11/23 Los Angeles challenged their no-goal vs Florida for goalie interference - they lost the challenge but won the game 11/22 San Jose challenged Columbus goal for goalie interference - they lost the challenge but won the game 11/20 Calgary challenged Chicago goal for goalie interference - they lost the challenge but won the game 11/20 Chicago challenged Calgary goal for goalie interference - they lost the challenge and the game 11/20 Montreal challenged New York I goal for goalie interference - they lost the challenge but won the game 11/19 Columbus challenged Ottawa goal for goalie interference - they won the challenge but lost the game 11/19 Washington challenged Dallas goal for goalie interference - they lost the challenge and the game 11/17 Dallas challenged Buffalo goal for offsides - they won the challenge and the game 11/17 Minnesota challenged Pittsburgh goal for goalie interference - they lost the challenge and the game 11/17 Boston challenged San Jose goal for goalie interference - they lost the challenge and the game 11/14 Toronto challenged Vancouver goal for offsides - they won the challenge and the game 11/14 Vancouver challenged Toronto goal for goalie interference - they lost the challenge and the game 11/14 Dallas challenged Minnesota goal for goalie interference - they lost the challenge but won the game 11/12 Buffalo challenged Florida goal for goalie interference - they lost the challenge but won the game 11/12 Florida challenged Buffalo goal for offsides - they won the challenge but lost the game 11/12 Philadelphia challenged Washington goal for goalie interference - they won the challenge but lost the game 11/12 Carolina challenged their no-goal vs Minnesota for goalie interference - they won the challenge but lost the game (OT) 11/12 Colorado challenged Boston goal for goalie interference - they lost the challenge but won the game 11/11 San Jose challenged New York I goal for offsides - they lost the challenge and the game 11/8 New Jersey challenged Vancouver goal for goalie interference - they won the challenge and the game 11/7 Toronto challenged Washington goal for goalie interference - they won the challenge but lost the game (SO) 11/7 Boston challenged Montreal goal for goalie interference - they won the challenge but lost the game 11/6 Edmonton challenged Pittsburgh goal for offsides - they won the challenge but lost the game 11/6 New Jersey challenged their no-goal vs Chicago for goalie interference - they lost the challenge but won the game 11/6 Carolina challenged Dallas goal for goalie interference - they lost the challenge and the game 11/5 Florida challenged San Jose goal for offsides - they won the challenge but lost the game 11/5 Colorado challenged Arizona goal for goalie interference - they lost the challenge and the game 11/3 Montreal challenged their no-goal vs Ottawa for goalie interference - they lost the challenge and the game (OT) 11/2 Dallas challenged Toronto goal for offsides - they won the challenge but lost the game 11/1 Colorado challenged San Jose goal for goalie interference - they lost the challenge and the game 10/31 Calgary challenged their no-goal vs Edmonton for goalie interference - they lost the challenge but won the game 10/31 Calgary challenged Edmonton goal for goalie interference - they won the challenge and the game 10/31 Florida challenged Washington goal for goalie interference - they lost the challenge and the game (OT) 10/31 San Jose challenged Dallas goal for offsides - they lost the challenge and the game 10/30 Washington challenged Columbus goal for goalie interference - they lost the challenge but won the game 10/30 Toronto challenged their no-goal vs New York R for goalie interference - they lost the challenge and the game 10/25 Minnesota challenged Winnipeg goal for offsides - they lost the challenge and the game 10/24 Carolina challenged San Jose goal for offsides - they lost the challenge and the game 10/24 New York R challenged their no-goal vs Philadelphia for goalie interference - they lost the challenge and the game (SO) 10/22 San Jose challenged Los Angeles goal for offsides - they lost the challenge and the game 10/17 Boston challenged Arizona goal for goalie interference - they lost the challenge but won the game 10/17 New York I challenged San Jose goal for goalie interference - they lost the challenge but won the game 10/17 Florida challenged their no-goal vs Dallas for goalie interference - they won the challenge but lost the game 10/16 Calgary challegned Winnipeg goal for offsides - they lost the challenge and the game 10/14 Arizona challenged their no-goal vs Anaheim for goalie interference - they lost the challenge but won the game 10/13 San Jose challenged Washington goal for goalie interference - they won the challenge and the game 10/10 St. Louis challenged Minnesota goal for goalie interference - they lost the challenge and the game 10/10 Boston challenged their no-goal vs Montreal for goalie interference - they lost the challenge and the game 10/8 Ottawa challenged Buffalo goal for offsides - they won the challenge and the game 10/7 Toronto challenged Montreal goal for offsides - they won the challenge but lost the game Key: BOLD means they lost the challenge and game or won the challenge and the game REGULAR means they won the challenge but lost the game ITALICS means they lost the challenge but won the game Edited December 5, 2015 by Hoss Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sabresouth Posted December 5, 2015 Author Report Share Posted December 5, 2015 Thanks Hoss, if I'm reading this right then the teams record that lose or are hurt by the challenge is 35-52-4 of 91. That's close to 62% lose rate. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SwampD Posted December 5, 2015 Report Share Posted December 5, 2015 The question is how many outcomes would have been changed had a goal not been overturned. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MODO Hockey Posted December 5, 2015 Report Share Posted December 5, 2015 OK, this is my first go at starting a thread, so here it goes. I put this in the game day thread but thought it might make a good topic. I think losing the challenge kills a team. I've only watched Sabres game's and of the four challenges made the team that lost the challenge lost the game. All of a sudden offsides and other calls are having more of an effect on games than they should. Does anybody know what the win loss record is for team's that lose the challenge? We all had our first! ;) This is my opinion .. I dont necessarily agree with you, maybe this is obvious for Sabres looking at challanges over the season, but to others? I must say no until told or showed otherwize. Dont know the answer to your question, but id say it sends an offensive state of mind from coach to players, to challange what he believes is wrong, most buildt on comments from players together with his own opinion, and i think this gives confidece for players overall. I do not like this challange, referees must be allowed to make misstakes, just as players, its within the game it self. We are only humans, so are our players and referees, we cannot foresee that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
woods-racer Posted December 5, 2015 Report Share Posted December 5, 2015 (edited) I am going to take this opportunity to state again my opposition to the challenge,even though we won it last night in the Arizona game. For the sake of argument I'm going to say there was no golie interference. My problem is that the high sticking call wasn't reviewable on the goal. A player being a couple of inches offsides is minimal to a goal being scored compared to a player being taken out of the play (in this case a high stick not being called). Correct me if I'm wrong, but the high sticking call would have been the highest percentage to overturn rather than the golie interference. It was the most obvious and easily seen on replay. Hence my assumption that the high sticking call wasn't reviewable. This is my problem with the challenge. They need to do away with it completely. I hated the HCDB challenged that gaol in the Arizona game. It was a nickel n dime infraction in a rugged game. It changed the the whole complexion of the game. Arizona had momentum and it was a one goal game. It got ruined. It's happen to the Sabres and I hated it, it happened to turn out in our favor this time and I still hate it. Edited December 5, 2015 by Woods-Racer Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MODO Hockey Posted December 5, 2015 Report Share Posted December 5, 2015 (edited) I hated the HCDB challenged that gaol in the Arizona game. It was a nickel n dime infraction in a rugged game. It changed the the whole complexion of the game. Arizona had momentum and it was a one goal game. It got ruined. It's happen to the Sabres and I hated it, it happened to turn out in our favor this time and I still hate it. In this matter, i must agree with you. But dont you think this will have a bit of different complextion of the game in the future when players and coaches are used to this type of situation ? or do you actually believe that this can ruin a game? i mean, if people get to know this rule together with players and coaches, dont you think it actually will become as known as players use suspensors? :D Edited December 5, 2015 by MODO Hockey Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.