International TournamentsDiscuss International Tournaments like the WJC, Olympics, and World Cup, as they take place, or discuss past tournaments. performances.
The game was reffed well, I agree. I was just pointing out that the first goal WAS offside.
And to the guy who thinks that should be reviewable, no. This is a game played by humans and reffed by humans, human error is a part of the game from every aspect.
Canada got away with one also...During a line change in the 3rd period a Canadian player (forget who it was) was skating towards the bench and about to hop off and the puck hit that player even after his replacement was on the ice already. So things happen!
Yeah, I know.
Someone mentioned that exact play, and my post was a reply to it. Sometimes it helps to read the quoted parts in people's posts so you can kinda follow the discussion
...
And to the guy who thinks that should be reviewable, no. This is a game played by humans and reffed by humans, human error is a part of the game from every aspect.
So to be consistent, you don't want any video review of any kind?
So to be consistent, you don't want any video review of any kind?
Things directly affecting the goal (like high stick, kicked, across the line, etc) are fine. They DIRECTLY impact the goal. You can't go back and review things that happened prior to a goal being scored though. Same reason that if a puck is played with a high stick and then a goal is scored, you can't review that.
the refs and linesmen did an absolutely fantastic job. they called the most flagrant penalties and let both teams play a hard-hitting, north american style game. all of them were a non-factor in the best possible way. and only a retard could think otherwise.
mccreary showed why he is the best in the business and why both teams wanted him to be a referee.
i've seen threads whining about "canadian referees" -- what these keyboard warriors don't know is that both teams are given a heads up on who is officiating the game and can file a dispute in case they disagree with a decision and nominate their own choices.
Agreed with this whole post. I wish the refs in the NHL could do it like the Olympics. I would take no touch icing and no trapezoid for that kind of hockey 82+ times a year.
the refs and linesmen did an absolutely fantastic job. they called the most flagrant penalties and let both teams play a hard-hitting, north american style game. all of them were a non-factor in the best possible way. and only a retard could think otherwise.
mccreary showed why he is the best in the business and why both teams wanted him to be a referee.
i've seen threads whining about "canadian referees" -- what these keyboard warriors don't know is that both teams are given a heads up on who is officiating the game and can file a dispute in case they disagree with a decision and nominate their own choices.
This. I thought the reffs did an amazing job of not influencing the game.
They called the obvious stuff and let the little things slide.
Agreed with this whole post. I wish the refs in the NHL could do it like the Olympics. I would take no touch icing and no trapezoid for that kind of hockey 82+ times a year.
Nobody can keep up that kind of intensity for that long regardless of the rule changes
Tell that to NFL fans when judging whether a player making a catch had two feet in bounds or not. Offside is a very similar situation and it should be reviewed. Especially in a championship game.
It's not the same situation at all. In the NFL they review the catch not the play leading up to the catch. Reviewing offsides prior to a goal would be like the NFL going back after every touchdown to review for illegal formations, false starts, ineligible recievers downfield, or anything else that can be claimed to have compromised the integrity of the play. It would be mayhem and absolutely nobody would enjoy it.
Of course, as I alluded in the prior post, I think the NFL has already gone overboard with reviews. Even the Super Bowl was slower than usual because of the insistence on endlessly replaying every close play to try and spot some tiny flaw in how a guy was holding the ball when he hit the ground. Even when it doesn't wipe out the play, it wipes out the offense's momentum and ultimately the drama of the moment.
They could have called it either way. That was one of the many non-calls in that game.
There were so many non-calls in that game, the guys in the zebra shirts might have well not even shown up.
this thread is just embarrasing. The refs obviously favored Canada in that game. I not one canadian can say otherwise. With that being said the game wasnt ruined by the officiating or the "offside" that wasnt called.
Canada fan here... His skate was in the blue while the puck fully entered the blue. Not offside.
Learn to read. His back foot was in the air. Your skate has to be on the ice, it cannot be in the air across the blue line. There is no rulebook in the sport that allows your back foot to be in the air to put yourself onside.
The photo suggests it is offside, however, we still need to know the point where the puck completely crossed the blue line.
If this was offside, it's easy to see how the linesman missed it. He's looking through 3-4 players. His partner on the other side was in a better position to see the player on the far side, and would have been well within his rights to blow play dead if it was offside.
Also, can people please stop saying "offsides". IT'S NOT "OFFSIDES"! It's "OFFSIDE". You can't be off on more than one side, so why do people pluralize it!?
Tell that to NFL fans when judging whether a player making a catch had two feet in bounds or not. Offside is a very similar situation and it should be reviewed. Especially in a championship game.
why don't we just review missed penalty calls too? Oh that may have been holding, lets go review it to see for sure. Worst idea I've ever heard.
this thread is just embarrasing. The refs obviously favored Canada in that game. I not one canadian can say otherwise. With that being said the game wasnt ruined by the officiating or the "offside" that wasnt called.
I'm Canadian and I'm saying otherwise, but thanks for coming out.
why don't we just review missed penalty calls too? Oh that may have been holding, lets go review it to see for sure. Worst idea I've ever heard.
You're making strawmen. No one suggested that. Penalties are not reviewable in any sport I know.
The things that are reviewable make sense to everyone. Not including offside though is silly. It's a situation not much different from the judgment used in whether a goal was the result of a high stick.
It's not the same situation at all. In the NFL they review the catch not the play leading up to the catch.
You're splitting some fine hairs. The NFL reviews whether a catch was made and that the player had both feet in bounds. They review all challenges (out side 2min of a half) if a coach is upset with the call on the field.
What I'm proposing is different. You don't review all offsides. You review the ones that resulted in goals and are challenged. Why wouldn't you want to get it right, especially in a championship game? You sound like people who didn't like video review in the NFL. Now everyone loves it. At least I do, I want the plays called right. The NFL is the best officiated sport in the world. The NHL needs to learn from them.
.. Same reason that if a puck is played with a high stick and then a goal is scored, you can't review that.
Good point, I forgot about that one, however, now that you mention it that one should be reviewed too. Get the calls right, that's the most important thing.
Didn't notice that. Oh well, we still won. Yzerman's goal in the 1996 World Cup vs. teh USA was offside and that was in overtime. What can you do? Now if Canada loses then there is a big debate a la 1980 Flyers over this. But they didn't. And Yzerman's goal in 1996 didn't mean a whole lot after all either.
