View Single Post
02-03-2013, 04:21 PM
STLBLUES44's Avatar
Join Date: Feb 2012
Country: United States
Posts: 2,348
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by 417blues View Post
I agree that a challenge could be useful - but if it cost a time out, would teams still get only one time out per game? I prefer the challenge-for-penalty idea, but not in every situation:

I don't think you'd need to charge a delay of game penalty in a situation like the Backes hit; he's already penalized, so in this case, a successful challenge would result in a reversal of the penalty. If unsuccessful, the penalty stands.

In a case where the coach *wants* a penalty called where there wasn't one, then then a trade for a penalty makes more sense. Delay of game seems to be the appropriate penalty but who would serve the minor if the challenge is unsuccessful?

(As an aside, in re: "Game Deciding" - in a game where the Blues get caught with too many men on the ice, it's hard to call any other penalty game-deciding.)
i say u shouldn't be penalized if your. wrong i think that u should get the option of either having one challenge or one timeout during a game and the challenge can only come if you don't think a penalty should be called on your player... not for if u think your guy drew one but didn't get the call

STLBLUES44 is offline