Skip to content

Video: Should all goals be subjected to video review?

Jun 12, 2014, 8:46 AM EDT

It looks like we aren’t going to get coach’s challenges next season, but is that the direction the NHL should be heading in? For that matter, should the NHL should utilized video reviews far more often than they currently do?

Eddie Olczyk and Don La Greca recently tackled that question and addressed, among other things, the idea that all goals should be reviewed.

You can watch that discuss below:

  1. sjsblitz - Jun 12, 2014 at 9:33 AM

    A coaching challenge of a goal seems more fitting

    • miketoasty - Jun 12, 2014 at 9:55 AM

      Make it so that the coach’s can challenge one play per game and if they fail the challenge they lose their timeout. It would keep games still relatively quick moving and still have the necessary repercussions so that we don’t see the challenge on the first ticky tacky call of the game.

      Also, make it so that they can challenge any play (Penalty, goal, offside) so that it’s as clear as possible.

      • barkar942 - Jun 12, 2014 at 11:37 AM

        If you really think about it, the video displays in the arenas are so good now, the coaches should be able to determine if they can win or lose a challenge before they even make one, so I think your idea, toasty, is the correct one. One thing though- don’t have the coach throw some kind of flag on the ice. If they do, then the 18000 refs in the stands (2200 in Florida) will be throwing them onto the ice constantly!

  2. mshantz22 - Jun 12, 2014 at 10:15 AM

    I personally think that all goals should be reviewed by the NHL off-ice officials and ultimate power given to them over the on-ice officials. There is just so much going on around the net for the refs to see everything. When they’re staring at the goal line looking for the puck to pass, he’s not going to be paying much attention to what’s going on with the goalie, and the second ref 100+ feet away can’t see anything. It would probably slow the game down a couple minutes, but there wouldn’t be any missed calls regarding goals.

    • jeesay101 - Jun 13, 2014 at 11:49 AM

      If the off-ice officials just reviewed it, wouldn’t that still leave the on-ice officials to make the initial call, of goal or not? In order to allow the on-ice officials the ability to watch the play rather than the puck crossing the line they would have to give the off-ice officials all authority on goals, and allow them to make the call. Which, if possible, could be interesting. But then again it could create a whole new controversy.

  3. joestemme - Jun 12, 2014 at 11:46 AM

    Yes. Just like TD’s are now automatically reviewed quickly after the play.

    Just cut to a commercial. Those two minutes should suffice to see if there is need for ‘further review’.

  4. whatiswrongwithu - Jun 12, 2014 at 12:11 PM

    Like the NFL. One challenge would suffice. However part of the game is the missed goals, blown calls and the subjectivity of the play. IMO hockey is the last pure sport left that let’s the game be played in its purity as it was intended to be played. Stop the madness. The hockey gods always give and take!!!

    • stakex - Jun 12, 2014 at 12:31 PM

      That’s just nonsense. Its not “pure” when one team loses, especially an important game, as a direct result of a blown call. Far too much goes into a season for that to happen when the technology is available to prevent it.

      Also, you really don’t know how the founders of the sport or the NHL would have intended for the game to be played if they had access to modern technology. If video review was possible when the NHL was founded nearly 100 years ago, I’m sure it would have been part of the game from the start.

  5. stakex - Jun 12, 2014 at 12:23 PM

    Lets get one thing strait…. all goals are already reviewed in the NHL. The “war room” is watching every game, and calls down when they feel a goal needs extra review… and the on ice officials will more times than not call for a review when a play is suspect. It doesn’t take much time to determine if a goal needs a second look.

    The problem is what can actually be reviewed. When that puck went in off the net a few months back for example, a lot of people complained that the refs didn’t call for a review. That wasn’t the issue, the issues was that pucks going in off the netting is not a reviewable play. So even though the guys in Toronto probably saw it, there was nothing that could be done after the good goal call on the ice.

    As such, the solution to this is very simple… expand video review to cover more circumstances. Goaltender interference, pucks going in off the netting, and offsides should all be added as reviewable situations when goals are scored. Some limits and rules would need to be worked out, as a missed offside two minutes before a goal was scored obviously shouldn’t result in a goal being waved off. One thing that really gets me is when the league says goalie interference isn’t reviewable because its a subjective call. So is kicking a puck into the net, and it makes little sense to rely on one set of eyes to make a subjective call in real time.

    • joestemme - Jun 12, 2014 at 12:29 PM

      Agreed. But, like I noted, ‘mandate’ a commercial break after each goal to give the NHL more time to review a play before the puck is dropped again. And, by all means, expand the type of plays that can be reviewed.

      P.S. I really don’t get why goalie interference isn’t reviewable any more. There was a time when even ONE skate in the crease could nullify a goal. The play in Game 2 had BOTH SKATES in the crease before the puck reached the net.

      • stakex - Jun 12, 2014 at 12:37 PM

        Yeah they could certainly do that.

        I am actually glad though that the NHL doesn’t disallow goals simply because of a skate in the crease anymore. It use to be infuriating to see a goal waved off because someone nowhere near the goalie had a toe in the crease. The way the rules should read, to make a review call easier, is that any contact in the crease with a goaltender by an attacking player, that isn’t the direct result of a push from a defender, should result in no goal. Unless you are bias, more times than not that won’t be very subjective.

    • titansbro - Jun 12, 2014 at 12:33 PM

      hit the nail on the head

  6. brandotho - Jun 12, 2014 at 1:16 PM

    Maybe that goal in Game 2 wasn’t goalie interference, but honestly it can’t hurt at all to simply look at every goal to try to see if that call should be made. Can’t deny that was the turning point of that game and maybe the series. The NFL automatically reviews every scoring play, MLB with its new challenge system gives free challenges on home run calls.

  7. djshnooks - Jun 12, 2014 at 1:49 PM

    I hate the thought of this, but if it gets things right, I guess I’m all for it.

    I just wish they wouldn’t keep trying to fix something that was never broken…and that goes for all of the sports, not just hockey.

    I was born in 1982 and got to witness some of the best hockey, football and basketball that there’s ever been, in the 80’s and 90’s.

    I just feel like the competition and rules in basketball are destroying that sport. The rules protecting the QB and WR’s are starting to hurt the game of football. And the rules in hockey, especially trying to get rid of fighting, is going to hurt hockey. Especially if they get rid of fighting and/or big hits…hockey will lose a lot of fans.

    But, my biggest concern? What is the point of having referee’s if we’re going to start relying on cameras and/or computers to make every call during a game?

    I hate to see a bad call or a non-call effect the outcome of the game, especially in the playoffs or a championship game…but a referee shouldn’t have his job if he needs to rely on a computer/camera to help him.

    I’m just scared sports is going to turn into a circus…and never be the same it was! :-(

    • stakex - Jun 12, 2014 at 2:23 PM

      I agree with a lot of what you are saying about changes to sports being for the worse. All those things you mentioned are about changing sports to encourage more scoring…. because that seems to be all that casual fans love, and its all about the casual fans.

      That really is a completely separate issue though. Video review just makes sure the calls made during the game are correct, and helps make sure the correct team wins any given game. It doesn’t fundamentally change anything about how the game is played. Do bad calls add to the history of sports? Sure…. but its not fair to an athlete who worked his ass off his whole life to get to the big game/series/moment, only to lose it because of an incompetent official makes a horrible call.

      I wish I could say the issue could be solved with better officials, but that’s just not the case. For as many bad calls as you see, NHL refs really are good at what they do. The sport is just fast, and its impossible for them to keep track of absolutely everything going on at any given moment. Even still, the refs/linesmen have complete control over everything else that happens on the ice and the calls that are made… but when it comes to goals, it would be damn near criminal to not use all the technology available to get it right in every possible circumstance.

  8. trolltoll11 - Jun 12, 2014 at 3:30 PM

    Why not place a computer chip in the puck and set up some lasers on the goal line. Obviously this will not be a fix it all but it will confirm goals 100% accurately and as quick as the referee is able to give the goal sign.

    Always thought they should do the same thing in football for first down markers and on the goal line. The argument I’ve heard is taking the human element out of the game but isn’t that the point? To get the call right every time, all the time, in a fraction of a second.

Sign up for Fantasy hockey

Top 10 NHL Player Searches
  1. J. Quick (1148)
  2. N. Horton (1006)
  3. C. Giroux (924)
  4. B. Bishop (900)
  5. E. Malkin (854)