13 replies to this topic

[Adidarw]

http://www.nhl.com/i...vid=DL|NHL|home

 

 

Mike Murphy, the National Hockey League's senior vice president of Hockey Operations, isn't ruling out the possibility that one day -- possibly soon -- the concept of a coach's challenge could exist in the NHL.

Murphy thinks challenges will be discussed next month, but is unsure of the amount of traction the conversation will generate because of the variables involved.

 

Personally, I think the number of situations where challenging a call would help in the NHL is very small.  It's one thing in football, but in a fast-paced game like hockey, I don't think it would help much.  I'd anticipate some coaches taking advantage of their new ability.  I can't think of any specific coaches that would do that, but I mean after a while it seems like once it's been taken advantage of one time it will snowball to teams taking advantage of it whenever they can.  Of course, there will be rules and penalties against abusing the system.  But I don't see this being an improvement to the game of hockey.

[Wings4Life19]

I'm not sure how it would help the game any. Any close goals are already reviewed and if they were to challenge an offsides or icing it wouldn't really matter all that much. The only thing that would have an affect on the game is if they were able to challenge penalty calls, and I would imagine the officials would be very much against that since a percentage of those are opinion based anyways.

[St. Michael (the Red Wing)]

Not gonna work unless it's on a penalty call. Video replay is effect for disputed goals and has been for awhile.

 

Maybe an offside call but regardless it slows the game down.

 

I'll pass on this.

[55fan]

I'm not sure how it would help the game any. Any close goals are already reviewed and if they were to challenge an offsides or icing it wouldn't really matter all that much. The only thing that would have an affect on the game is if they were able to challenge penalty calls, and I would imagine the officials would be very much against that since a percentage of those are opinion based anyways.

This is it. 

 

I don't see it coming unless it's very, very limited.

[wings_fanatic]

I think it would help to challenge on goalie interference calls. How many times have the Wings been given those BS goalie interference calls where a goal is called off? Take a look at this video and how we were ROBBED from going to overtime.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x7qTMC7B8Js 

 

There are other examples as well, but I think coaches having an ability to challenge calls such as this would be HUGE.

[MidMichSteve]

I don't like the idea. Of course I've never liked any rule changes.

[sleepwalker]

I like the idea of giving Toronto final say in disputed goals, and allowing them to review all goals.

 

Some of the most controversial goals and non-goals are non-reviewable, due to the refs on ice calls. 

 

Lest we forget the situation with Brad Mays goal and Dennis LaRue's horrible s*** call?

 

(thats one that still sticks out in my head, horrible call, but it was non-reviewable and LaRues call stood despite definitive video evidence that it was without a doubt a 100% good goal)

Edited by sleepwalker, 26 February 2013 - 08:08 PM.

[evilmrt]

The challenge is good if it allows "non reviewable" goal calls to be reviewed after a challenge. I'm surprised at the amount of naysayers here, considering the amount of waived off goals we've all seen...unless you whiners are newbies, then it makes sense ;-)

[cusimano_brothers]

Uncle Gary says; "We have the best officials of any major sport".

They'll allow throwing a flag but not an octopus? That hardly seems fair.

[evilmrt]

Uncle Gary says; "We have the best officials of any major sport".
They'll allow throwing a flag but not an octopus? That hardly seems fair.

You need to start a Uncle Gary fan club asap!

[SDavis35]

The challenge is good if it allows "non reviewable" goal calls to be reviewed after a challenge. I'm surprised at the amount of naysayers here, considering the amount of waived off goals we've all seen...unless you whiners are newbies, then it makes sense ;-)

 

I'm torn on the idea... as mentioned earlier in the topic, it would need to be fairly limited in order to not slow the game down. If you narrow down the necessary situations, you would have: Intent to Blow, Goalie Interference, Kicking Motion, Frozen/Smothered Puck. I'm not sure if you could challenge the offside... but there should be some review when it's such a bad call as per Duschene last week. 

 

If we changed the way we review goals and decided "hey, let's review those Goalie Interference calls, and maybe that whole frozen puck thing too." then we wouldn't need a challenge as far as I'm thinking. 

[55fan]

The challenge is good if it allows "non reviewable" goal calls to be reviewed after a challenge. I'm surprised at the amount of naysayers here, considering the amount of waived off goals we've all seen...unless you whiners are newbies, then it makes sense ;-)

The problem is the "non-reviewable" part.  If it's non-reviewable, it's probably non-challengable, in which case all of the stupid goals that we've screeched ourselves into laryngitis over are still going to be waived off.

 

Intent to blow is the big one.  How are they supposed to challenge his intent?

-Didn't mean to!

-Did so!

-Did not!

-Did too!

 

Now if they come up with a challenge where the ref has to state the reason for which he intended to blow the whistle, and then that action becomes challengable, then we might be talking.

[St. Michael (the Red Wing)]

The challenge is good if it allows "non reviewable" goal calls to be reviewed after a challenge. I'm surprised at the amount of naysayers here, considering the amount of waived off goals we've all seen...unless you whiners are newbies, then it makes sense ;-)

 

Now that I think about it more maybe your right. I can remember last year if not the season before many Homer goals called off while he was in front of the net that probably were legit.

Edited by St. Michael (the Red Wing), 27 February 2013 - 10:05 AM.

[MTU_Huskies963]

What would even be challengable? I think goaltender interference should be reviewed no matter what, not challeneged. This will not fix problems such as brad may's dissallowed goal. The league would not even have to worry about something like this if they just changed what was reviewable. The only instance I could see this working on is for maybe delay of game calls, or a player being offsides. Reviewing penalties is a slippery slope though.