Dec 20, 2013, 2:42 PM EDT
Former NHL referee Kerry Fraser says last night’s controversial shootout in Toronto highlighted two major problems with the NHL’s video review system.
The goal in question came during James van Riemsdyk‘s shootout attempt on Phoenix’s Mike Smith — even though there was no definitive call on the ice and video replay failed to confirm the puck crossed the line, van Riemsdyk was awarded a goal.
Video review must clearly see the puck across the goal line with an unobstructed view before they will verify a goal. The evidence must be unequivocal! If this can’t be achieved video review personnel render an ‘inconclusive’ verdict even in cases where it appears logical that the puck would have crossed the line.
The referee, on the other hand, as we saw demonstrate on this call, allowed a goal to stand by applying logic, common sense and the power of deduction to determine that in his judgment the puck had crossed the goal line.
My recommendation is to provide the referee with the authority to review controversial goals at ice level (including goalkeeper interference) and have the final authority and judgment in these matters. The optics on JVR’s ultimate goal determination looked ridiculous!
Referee [Rob] Martell (and Paul Devorski) did not make a decision on the play in real time. Martell then spent several minutes communicating through a head set and staring into space. Following the inconclusive review verdict, Referee Martell was forced to render a final decision – one that he was unable or unwilling to make in real time!
The Refs are supposed to make a call one way or the other in real time; let them also make the final decision through the video review process.
Here’s a replay of the incident:
Note that none of the on-ice officials make any sort of definitive “good goal” signal — in fact, there doesn’t appear to be any signal at all, something Smith confirmed following the game.
“He came and whispered it in my ear like ‘it’s a goal,’ and he didn’t really give a signal that it was,” Smith said, as per NHL.com. “He made the call, he said he saw it go in. It’s unfortunate, but that’s the way it goes.”
The NHL offered a brief explanation of the call via its Situation Room blog, saying that “video review was inconclusive” and that “therefore, the referee’s call on the ice stands.”
- Lightning’s Vasilevskiy out 2-3 months after getting blood clot removed 3
- Jonathan Toews talks about the Patrick Kane situation 23
- Voynov detained by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement 22
- Ex-‘Hawks goalie Raanta tees off on former club 31
- Report: Hawks feel Kane ‘disrespected’ team, have received trade calls 119
- Hawks’ biggest question: What happens with Patrick Kane? 82
- Hall of Famer Al Arbour passes away 22
- Poll: Who will be San Jose’s next captain? 24
- Mike Richards charged with possession of controlled substance 95
- Gio won’t go: Flames extend Giordano for six years, $40.5M 13
- Report: Hawks feel Kane ‘disrespected’ team, have received trade calls (119)
- Hawks’ biggest question: What happens with Patrick Kane? (82)
- Report: Hawks’ Kane has not been asked to waive his no-move clause (47)
- Lucic jokes about running through Rask ‘like I did (to) another goalie’ (43)
- It’s Chicago Blackhawks day at PHT (41)