View Single Post
Old
04-12-2012, 11:45 AM
  #110
fly4apuckguy
Mr. Old School
 
fly4apuckguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,117
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeh82 View Post
You're right in a sense--and I was wrong, since the error clearly came before the touch up.

But actually, that only makes it more black-and-white and less of a judgement call.

There are specific conditions attached to whether a linesman can cancel an icing--judgement calls to be sure, but they can't simply do it because they feel like it. If you watch the replay, none of those conditions (no effort to play the puck, near a teammate, etc.) are relevant. The fact that the linesman clearly waves icing off early (from the other side of the ice no less) doesn't make it better or worse--

Given where the puck was when the second linesman waved off icing--and the fact that no Philadelphia or Pittsburgh player are within 10 feet of it--the the only plausible conclusion is that he didn't see where the puck was shot from. That's not a judgement call. The rule is quite explicit.

That is no more of a judgement call than the blue-line/ offsides: either it was shot from (well beyond) the red line or it wasn't; either Briere entered the zone before the puck or he didn't. In both cases, the official was out of position and made the wrong call.
I hate doing this because it always gets me flamed for twenty pages, but in certain instances I feel I need to...

I officiated for about 12 years or so. The rules for icing are explicit, but the judgement isn't. As a linesman, I have to quickly judge a number of factors to raise my hand or not. I believe, as you do, that it should have been icing. However, players know that there are a number of factors involved, so you always play to the whistle (or at least you should - we are taught this). There are too many factors involved: the speed of the puck, the skating speed of the defender, how close the defender was to the puck, how much effort he put into reaching it, where the puck crossed the goal line in relation to the players involved, where it was passed or shot from in relation to the red line, etc. Each one could factor in to whether or not the play is called, so as a player, you HAVE to assume something has happened to get it called off until you hear that whistle.

On an off-side, there is ZERO room for interpretation. You can't say, "Well he could have stayed onside if he dragged a toe" or "He could have gotten back onside if he had hustled". It is black and white.

Both blown calls, but one certainly more cut and dried than the other, and more directly contributing to a bad goal.

fly4apuckguy is offline   Reply With Quote