Jump to content

GDT: Sabres at Maple Leafs, Saturday 11/30/19, 7:00 pm


nfreeman

Recommended Posts

9 minutes ago, Thorny said:

The no goal I think comes down to “bad rule” rather than bad call. I’m not sure you could say it was definitive, even though it seemed to be much more likely in than not. 

I’ll never understand why they default to the, many times obscured, view of the on-ice official in these situations when a more common sense “most likely based on the angles available” judgment would seem to be more logical. 

Interesting. So sort of a civil instead of criminal standard? Preponderance of evidence vs. beyond a reasonable doubt. Just watched it again. Wow is it close.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, PASabreFan said:

Interesting. So sort of a civil instead of criminal standard? Preponderance of evidence vs. beyond a reasonable doubt. Just watched it again. Wow is it close.

That’s exactly what the league does. It’s prove it to an absolute certainty or we are going with the call on ice. As soon as I saw the review I knew there was no chance we were getting it. 

The NFL is doing the same thing with the PI reviews this year, and it’s pointless, and it’s why it’s getting scrapped after this season. 

Basically in the NHL, they don’t go to replay to determine what the most correct call is based on all evidence (I’d argue that would be the most logical), they use replay to see if they can disprove the call already made with gun-to-head, absolute certainty.  

Edited by Thorny
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Thorny said:

That’s exactly what the league does. It’s prove it to an absolute certainty or we are going with the call on ice. As soon as I saw the review I knew there was no chance we were getting it. 

The NFL is doing the same thing with the PI reviews this year, and it’s pointless, and it’s why it’s getting scrapped after this season. 

Basically in the NHL, they don’t go to replay to determine what the most correct call is based on all evidence (I’d argue that would be the most logical), they use replay to see if they can disprove the call already made with gun-to-head, absolute certainty.  

They'd say they don't want to take the game out of the refs' hands entirely.

  • Like (+1) 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, PASabreFan said:

They'd say they don't want to take the game out of the refs' hands entirely.

Which I think is a poor argument, in that why have replay at all if not to get the call right. 

If you are going to default to the calls on ice in 99% of cases, scrap it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Thorny said:

Which I think is a poor argument, in that why have replay at all if not to get the call right. 

If you are going to default to the calls on ice in 99% of cases, scrap it. 

The rule should be changed to reflect the NFL model.  Puck needs only to break the plain.  Not the whole puck.  Make it easier to call.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This topic is OLD. A NEW topic should be started unless there is a VERY SPECIFIC REASON to revive this one.

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...