from Steve Simmons of the Toronto Sun,
The last thing the NHL — or any other professional league — needs right now is more instant replay.At a time when we don’t necessarily know what a goal is, what’s a ball and a strike, what’s a foul in the NBA or what constitutes a catch in the NFL, the NHL is looking to add more opportunities for video review challenges.
When instant replay was introduced in North American pro sports — to get the calls right, remember — it wasn’t thoroughly thought out or examined. The intent was not to turn games into lengthy breakdowns of milliseconds of inconclusive replays.
Games in hockey and goals are now being determined regularly by computer geeks sitting in their offices away from the ice and finding reasons to challenge offside calls.Instant replay was supposed to rid the game of obvious mistakes.
But instead, goaltender interference, determining what exactly is a goal and the picayune nature of the offside regulations have stolen from the game and made it worse, certainly not better.You need a glossary today to understand what kind of calls can or can’t be challenged in the NFL. Some of the coaches don’t seem to know the rules.
continued plus more hockey topics...
I'm all for axing replay reviews altogether, full stop. But the NHL and Li'l Gary's overlords in the gambling industry won't have it, so it's not going away. And the gambling ppl want everything reviewed, because to THEM getting every call "right" is of utmost importance. The fans want an entertaining product on the ice, but with the introduction of the digital board ads that move around during play, it's pretty obvious that the league no longer takes the fans into consideration.
That has become a common complaint at all professional sports leagues, including English Premier league and all of world football. If you remove that for expediency and flow so that obvious goals or touchdowns or catches on the sideline are missed, then fans would raise holy hell.
I don't mind the reviews, honestly, and I think there's a time and place for them.
That said, what I WOULD like is if the reviews happened off site, such as in the situation room. Then you don't have the ref skating back and forth to the time keepers box to put on a headset, grab the screen, and watch it a few times. By the time they start their review, it could have been completed off site.
I know in the past one of the things the NHL said is they want the officials who made/didn't make the call to be the one reviewing it, but honestly, if the goal is to get it right, what's the point of using the on-site refs?
Replays were pushed by an event close to Detroit fans' hearts:
Replay already was used for HR determination, but now the calls for expanding it had a concrete example. Galarraga wasn't just robbed of the record--but the celebration with teammates. The recourse of replay can correct one thing: see even today you can go back in the official record book and see that Galarraga never pitched a perfect game--but that is not what I saw happen that night and the broadcast proved it.
Replay can't give him back the momentary celebration, but it can correct the official record. And I am fine with that. Want to tweak it to be less intrusive by having an off ice official handle it in the situation room that is fine by me. Forget the headset: let the on-ice official watch it on the scoreboard with the fans.
Refs will have to deal with automation and AI that is coming for their jobs just like the rest of us.
So it goes beyond the gambling crowd wanting everything right.
"computer geeks"
Oh fuck off, out-of-touch old man
Guess I wasn't the only one who found that comment unnecessary.
I'm not a big fan of NHL replays on anything more than "did the puck cross the goal line" but I don't see the changes the NHL discussed coming up often at all, maybe once every 10 games?
Create an Account
In order to leave a comment, please create an account.