Sabre fan Posted May 30, 2017 Report Share Posted May 30, 2017 It seems that what started as a good idea has blown up in the NHL's face. The coach's challenge has led to long delays, and calls being made when they are thought or appear to be the opposite. The funny thing is that the coach's voted it in but now seem to be regretting that decision. Do you like it or hate it? I think the natural ebb and flow of the game has been lost by calls being challenged now that would have gone forward in the "old" game. yes there were offside goals but did they not even themselves out? Interesting read anyways... http://www.wgr550.com/articles/news/bettman-coachs-challenge-working-exactly-they-were-intended Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bob_sauve28 Posted May 30, 2017 Report Share Posted May 30, 2017 I hate it. It's just a game we don't need a full court hearing to decide a stupid call. To error is human, let's keep it a human game Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LGR4GM Posted May 30, 2017 Report Share Posted May 30, 2017 Good thread. I hate the offsides challenge because the way the offsides rule is written is atrocious Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Winston Posted May 30, 2017 Report Share Posted May 30, 2017 The offside rule is in place to keep players from cherry picking. If the offsides isn't evident to the human eye, then it isn't a substantial enough advantage to be worth reviewing IMO. It's just not what the rule is written for. It's obnoxiously stupid to halt a game and wipe a highlight goal off the board over something that didn't actually impact the outcome of the play. My two cents, anyways. I like the blueline and offsides and having to clear the zone, etc. That's hockey. Scrutinizing a players' toes on an ipad when he didn't even impact the play, that isn't hockey. Goaltender interference, now that's a worthy infraction to review. Get more angles, see if the goalie was really impeded. Those challenged are out of legit belief that your goalie was interfered with. The offside challenge is more like, "oh , we got scored on, let's get off on a technicality." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bob_sauve28 Posted May 30, 2017 Report Share Posted May 30, 2017 The offside rule is in place to keep players from cherry picking. If the offsides isn't evident to the human eye, then it isn't a substantial enough advantage to be worth reviewing IMO. It's just not what the rule is written for. It's obnoxiously stupid to halt a game and wipe a highlight goal off the board over something that didn't actually impact the outcome of the play. My two cents, anyways. I like the blueline and offsides and having to clear the zone, etc. That's hockey. Scrutinizing a players' toes on an ipad when he didn't even impact the play, that isn't hockey. Goaltender interference, now that's a worthy infraction to review. Get more angles, see if the goalie was really impeded. Those challenged are out of legit belief that your goalie was interfered with. The offside challenge is more like, "oh ######, we got scored on, let's get off on a technicality." I agree with all this except the offsides. I'd like to see no offsides, no icing just to see what it would be like. It might be better. It might be worse but I don't think anyone knows until they see it. It would be different Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beer Posted May 30, 2017 Report Share Posted May 30, 2017 (edited) The reversal last night was brutal. I was so angry I nearly shut off the game. The Preds got hosed. They need to get rid of the offsides challenge immediately. I don't trust Toronto to be impartial, especial if it involves the Leafs. Edited May 30, 2017 by Beer Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
inkman Posted May 30, 2017 Report Share Posted May 30, 2017 That call may have cost the Preds the series Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Randall Flagg Posted May 31, 2017 Report Share Posted May 31, 2017 It seemed like a valid reaction to the Briere and Colorado goals at the time for me, but when I routinely see icings get let go because players "basically" came within 4 feet of the red line before shooting it in, I have to wonder why one line infraction is super special and the other isn't. If I were forced to make an immediate decision with a gun to my head, I'd keep the goalie interference challenge and dump the offsides one, and have a group in Toronto check the goals rather than the officials who made the original call, and rewrite the rules to make it completely clear what constitutes goalie interference so we don't see the wild inconsistency that we have with the call so far. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dudacek Posted May 31, 2017 Report Share Posted May 31, 2017 (edited) The offsides review is a terrible rule. Traditionalists will choke because of the cherry picking stigma, but opening up the ice by eliminating offside would be the best thing to happen to the entertainment value of modern hockey. Edited May 31, 2017 by dudacek Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ubkev Posted May 31, 2017 Report Share Posted May 31, 2017 The offsides review is a terrible rule. Traditionalists will choke because of the cherry picking stigma, but opening up the ice by eliminating offside would be the best thing to happen to the entertainment value of modern hockey. Word! If they want to cherry pick, let em. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrueBlueGED Posted May 31, 2017 Report Share Posted May 31, 2017 The coach's challenge remains a good idea with terrible execution. The good news is it's incredibly easy to fix. The bad news is, as they say, the first step is admitting you have a problem...which the league is loathe to do. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
North Buffalo Posted May 31, 2017 Report Share Posted May 31, 2017 I thought it might be good, but not for offsides. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SwampD Posted May 31, 2017 Report Share Posted May 31, 2017 I don't mind it. The whole ebb and flow thing is misguided, I think. To my eye, there are just less offside whistles during a game, which are WAY more disruptive to the ebb and flow of a game than one reviewed goal call every 5(?) games. There was a stretch in Pitt/Ott game 7 (I think) that went 8+ minutes without a whistle. No way that happens without that rule and guys being extra careful to not be the one who costs them a goal. I think as more and more players live with the rule it will be less of an issue going forward Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sabre1974 Posted May 31, 2017 Report Share Posted May 31, 2017 it does my head in to be honest Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PromoTheRobot Posted May 31, 2017 Report Share Posted May 31, 2017 It's a bad idea...until the Sabres get jobbed by a call. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoPre Posted May 31, 2017 Report Share Posted May 31, 2017 Watched this video for the first time today. Funny stuff. And no, I do not support the coaches challenge. Dump it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darksabre Posted May 31, 2017 Report Share Posted May 31, 2017 It's a bad idea...until the Sabres get jobbed by a call. We already got jobbed. Until every team in the league loses in the Cup Finals to a goal that shouldn't have counted, I will call the replay system BS. Let everyone suffer like we did, then we can talk. 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.