HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > International Tournaments
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
International Tournaments Discuss international tournaments such as the World Juniors, Olympic hockey, and Ice Hockey World Championships, as they take place; or discuss past tournaments.

The Offside Goal

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
03-01-2010, 02:48 PM
  #26
tarheelhockey
Global Moderator
 
tarheelhockey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: The Triangle
Country: United States
Posts: 33,155
vCash: 500
(Note 1) A player is “on-side” when “either” of his skates
are in contact with the Neutral Zone ice or when the entire
player, including both skates, is completely behind the
determining edge of the blue line, at the instant the puck
completely crosses the outer edge of that line, regardless of
the position of his stick.

tarheelhockey is offline  
Old
03-01-2010, 02:49 PM
  #27
Foy
Registered User
 
Foy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Country: United States
Posts: 20,951
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BruinsButton View Post
You better check your rule book. The skate needs to be on the ice.
there's nothing about that in the IIHF rulebook, which I just checked.

Foy is offline  
Old
03-01-2010, 02:50 PM
  #28
Foy
Registered User
 
Foy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Country: United States
Posts: 20,951
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by tarheelhockey View Post
(Note 1) A player is “on-side” when “either” of his skates
are in contact with the Neutral Zone ice or when the entire
player, including both skates, is completely behind the
determining edge of the blue line, at the instant the puck
completely crosses the outer edge of that line, regardless of
the position of his stick.
may I ask where you pulled that from? I'm looking at the IIHF website, and I don't see that. I'm genuinely interested in the actual rule here.

Foy is offline  
Old
03-01-2010, 02:50 PM
  #29
Eukaryote
Registered User
 
Eukaryote's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,548
vCash: 500
How's this a debate? It was clearly offside and the evidence is decisive. I don't think it was close and the linesman should have made that call. But, he didn't; it was a mistake that happens.

However, this is a situation that should be reviewable and I can't see any argument as to why it shouldn't be. High sticks are reviewed. Kicking pucks in is reviewed. And offsides should be reviewed so that things like Kesler's goal don't count.

It's a gold medal game and they need to get every goal right.

Eukaryote is offline  
Old
03-01-2010, 02:53 PM
  #30
gcdc14
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 687
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kezia View Post
Yeah we ignored it because it is irrelevant. If your back foot is not on the ice, your front foot is the one that counts. And in this case his front foot was offside. Is it that hard to comprehend, I understood that even before becoming an official.
You obviously didn't ignore it if you are explaining it for a second time. Way to go *******.

gcdc14 is offline  
Old
03-01-2010, 02:54 PM
  #31
tarheelhockey
Global Moderator
 
tarheelhockey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: The Triangle
Country: United States
Posts: 33,155
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Foy View Post
may I ask where you pulled that from? I'm looking at the IIHF website, and I don't see that. I'm genuinely interested in the actual rule here.
It's from the USA Hockey rulebook, per NYR Fan's comment.

tarheelhockey is offline  
Old
03-01-2010, 02:57 PM
  #32
Foy
Registered User
 
Foy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Country: United States
Posts: 20,951
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by tarheelhockey View Post
It's from the USA Hockey rulebook, per NYR Fan's comment.
thank you very much.

Foy is offline  
Old
03-01-2010, 02:58 PM
  #33
tarheelhockey
Global Moderator
 
tarheelhockey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: The Triangle
Country: United States
Posts: 33,155
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eukaryote View Post
However, this is a situation that should be reviewable and I can't see any argument as to why it shouldn't be. High sticks are reviewed. Kicking pucks in is reviewed. And offsides should be reviewed so that things like Kesler's goal don't count.
For the love of god, hockey is not a sport played by video review specialists!

I can understand reviews for things like whether the puck crossed the line, whether there was time on the clock, perhaps even a high stick or kick if it was really flagrant. But when we get to the point that goals are being reviewed to determine whether some minor infraction occurred up-ice by a guy who wasn't even connected to the play, count me out. This is the stuff that makes the last 2 minutes of an NFL game impossible to watch.

tarheelhockey is offline  
Old
03-01-2010, 02:59 PM
  #34
kingsholygrail
Interference = Cup
 
kingsholygrail's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Derpifornia
Country: United States
Posts: 44,162
vCash: 500
When does the puck cross the line?

kingsholygrail is offline  
Old
03-01-2010, 03:02 PM
  #35
Eukaryote
Registered User
 
Eukaryote's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,548
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by tarheelhockey View Post
IMO it's petty to say a goal shouldn't count because of a close offside call. Refs are not robots, and the call was close enough not to have any effect on the goal.
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.

Eukaryote is offline  
Old
03-01-2010, 03:02 PM
  #36
MeHateHe
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 397
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nordique View Post
How about the too many men on the ice missed call, when the canadian players back skate dragging across the ice as he stepped into the bench, blocked the clearing attempt by the U.S. That missed call had a much more substantial effect on the puck than the off wing being a few inches offsides on a play he didn't even factor into.

It was a great game, imo the officiating was good, not perfect, but good.
Too many commentators get this wrong. A puck going off a player in the middle of the change - which is what you're referring to - is not a TMM penalty. The player in the middle of a change (coming on or going off) has to make a play on the puck. It seemed to me that the puck on that play hit a player making the change, but there was no intent to play the puck.

Now, that one with about two minutes left in regulation at the U.S. bench...

MeHateHe is offline  
Old
03-01-2010, 03:03 PM
  #37
dubey
Cookie Powered
 
dubey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: The Hackey Mecca
Country: Canada
Posts: 19,743
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by dystemper View Post
i don't even know why this is a thread.

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.
Yup. The refereeing was perfect. I love when they only call penalties that absolutely need to be called and leave the questionable stuff so it doesn't disrupt the flow or intensity of the game.

Best reffed game in a while.

dubey is offline  
Old
03-01-2010, 03:03 PM
  #38
Roo
Registered User
 
Roo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,249
vCash: 500
The pic means nothing
You need to see where the puck is, and confirm the point where it crosses the line for observation.

Roo is offline  
Old
03-01-2010, 03:04 PM
  #39
sparxx87
Registered User
 
sparxx87's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Etobicoke
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,852
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NYR Fan in PGH View Post
To whoever mentioned something about Brown's back skate not touching the ice:

That doesn't matter. As a USA Hockey Referee, I know that the lines extend vertically ad infinitum. As long as his skate is in the plane of the blue line, it's not offsides.
All good, but Brown is clearly offside, his back foot is not in contact with the line....I could be wrong, but I think thats the rule....

We won, so who cares...but without this missed call, its a different game, 2-0 is wayy different then 2-1....that gave the Americans life, and shouldn't have.

I thought you were wrong with the "plane", but I checked the rule book to be sure, and your skate has to be on the ice, your wrong Mr. 'USA hockey referee'......This isn't football....


Last edited by sparxx87: 03-01-2010 at 03:10 PM.
sparxx87 is offline  
Old
03-01-2010, 03:04 PM
  #40
SLang
Registered User
 
SLang's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Huntington Beach, CA
Posts: 3,606
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by tarheelhockey View Post
For the love of god, hockey is not a sport played by video review specialists!

I can understand reviews for things like whether the puck crossed the line, whether there was time on the clock, perhaps even a high stick or kick if it was really flagrant. But when we get to the point that goals are being reviewed to determine whether some minor infraction occurred up-ice by a guy who wasn't even connected to the play, count me out. This is the stuff that makes the last 2 minutes of an NFL game impossible to watch.
Exactly. I mean, are we going to start video reviewing plays where a penalty should have been called, but wasn't, too? The NHL's efforts to speed up the game have actually worked well. Games that used to take 3 hours now only take 2-1/2. The Olympic games are even faster-moving - NHL needs to adopt the automatic icing rule too. Once again, I loved how that further sped up the game and eliminated the risk of injuries when players race to touch up.

BTW, this specific offsides non-call was closer than the pic, and many of the comments here, make it seem. During the replay, I remember thinking it was so close that the angle of the camera to the blue line could have made it appear offsides when it wasn't. The linesman had a waaay better view than that camera angle.

SLang is offline  
Old
03-01-2010, 03:05 PM
  #41
southpaw24
Registered User
 
southpaw24's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Owen Sound, ON
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,428
vCash: 500
does this really matter??? i mean really? does it REALLY matter??




















no it doesnt.








/end thread

southpaw24 is offline  
Old
03-01-2010, 03:06 PM
  #42
Sony Eriksson*
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: N. Dallas/NYC
Country: Faroe Islands
Posts: 13,583
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jawno View Post
Well, there was also a missed call when the Americans had too many men on the ice with 2:30 left in the 3rd period. It was pretty blatant, too.

But yeah, aside from some little things, the reffing was good for a change
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!

Sony Eriksson* is offline  
Old
03-01-2010, 03:08 PM
  #43
Eukaryote
Registered User
 
Eukaryote's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,548
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by tarheelhockey View Post
For the love of god, hockey is not a sport played by video review specialists!

I can understand reviews for things like whether the puck crossed the line, whether there was time on the clock, perhaps even a high stick or kick if it was really flagrant. But when we get to the point that goals are being reviewed to determine whether some minor infraction occurred up-ice by a guy who wasn't even connected to the play, count me out. This is the stuff that makes the last 2 minutes of an NFL game impossible to watch.
Perhaps? Those are reviewable and it's good thing they are. Adding offside to the mix makes just as much sense. We're talking about only reviewing goals resulting from them, not every offside.

How long would it take, maybe 2 or 3 minutes?

Eukaryote is offline  
Old
03-01-2010, 03:09 PM
  #44
Nordique
Registered User
 
Nordique's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Ohio
Country: United States
Posts: 7,158
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MeHateHe View Post
Too many commentators get this wrong. A puck going off a player in the middle of the change - which is what you're referring to - is not a TMM penalty. The player in the middle of a change (coming on or going off) has to make a play on the puck. It seemed to me that the puck on that play hit a player making the change, but there was no intent to play the puck.

Now, that one with about two minutes left in regulation at the U.S. bench...
I won't argue that point, but my point was that the Canadian skater "dragged" his back foot across the ice rather than stepping off the ice.

Regardless, I thought it was a well called game, with an acceptable number of bad calls that got past the officials both ways.

Nordique is online now  
Old
03-01-2010, 03:12 PM
  #45
Eukaryote
Registered User
 
Eukaryote's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,548
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by southpaw24 View Post
does this really matter??? i mean really? does it REALLY matter??
For the yesterday's game, not really. But for the next potential game? Absolutely. Offside goals need to be reviewable.

Eukaryote is offline  
Old
03-01-2010, 03:15 PM
  #46
DungeonK
Love Thy Neighbor
 
DungeonK's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Atlanta
Country: United States
Posts: 5,617
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eukaryote View Post
Perhaps? Those are reviewable and it's good thing they are. Adding offside to the mix makes just as much sense. We're talking about only reviewing goals resulting from them, not every offside.

How long would it take, maybe 2 or 3 minutes?
So you want to go back and have a video review EVERY TIME someone scores a goal to make sure they got into the zone clean? Even if a minute and a half of offensive zone possession pass?

That's almost as asinine as suggesting a player a couple inches offsides should be grounds to overturn a goal he had nothing to do with.

The great conspiracy you're missing here is that players are offsides quite a bit, but many times it is so close that nobody really cares. It annoys the hell out of me when extremely close offsides calls are made- just let them play the damn game. Stopping to review something this minor is completely counter-productive to the game.

DungeonK is offline  
Old
03-01-2010, 03:17 PM
  #47
Nordique
Registered User
 
Nordique's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Ohio
Country: United States
Posts: 7,158
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eukaryote View Post
For the yesterday's game, not really. But for the next potential game? Absolutely. Offside goals need to be reviewable.
Are we going to then review everything leading up to every goal? I mean how else are you going to be sure a two line/offsides pass didn't precede a goal?

Offsides are missed sometimes, other times they are incorrectly whistled. Thats just part of the game.

How about whistling a play dead when the goalie doesn't have control of the puck? That is much more influential on goal scoring than blown offsides calls. My point is we have to accept that human error on the part of officials is going to sometimes effect the outcome of games. There is no getting around it.

Nordique is online now  
Old
03-01-2010, 03:18 PM
  #48
MeHateHe
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 397
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nordique View Post
I won't argue that point, but my point was that the Canadian skater "dragged" his back foot across the ice rather than stepping off the ice.

Regardless, I thought it was a well called game, with an acceptable number of bad calls that got past the officials both ways.
I'll watch it again, but that's a pretty tough argument to make. The example at the US bench was much more blatant (although I'm not entirely sure there were six US players on the ice at the time). It was a clever play by one of the Canadian forwards (Getzlaf?) who played the puck directly at a US player coming off the bench.

Regardless, check out post #42. That's the mis-perception: that if the puck hits a player in the middle of the change, that's an automatic too-many-men call. Commentators get it wrong, which makes anyone who's refereed a game or four want to pull their hair out. If you get paid for commenting at a hockey game, you should know the rules.

MeHateHe is offline  
Old
03-01-2010, 03:22 PM
  #49
DanyHeatleyfnAllstar
French Coach!
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Calgry
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,208
vCash: 500
Suspend him and revoke his medal.

DanyHeatleyfnAllstar is offline  
Old
03-01-2010, 03:24 PM
  #50
Nordique
Registered User
 
Nordique's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Ohio
Country: United States
Posts: 7,158
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MeHateHe View Post
I'll watch it again, but that's a pretty tough argument to make. The example at the US bench was much more blatant (although I'm not entirely sure there were six US players on the ice at the time). It was a clever play by one of the Canadian forwards (Getzlaf?) who played the puck directly at a US player coming off the bench.

Regardless, check out post #42. That's the mis-perception: that if the puck hits a player in the middle of the change, that's an automatic too-many-men call. Commentators get it wrong, which makes anyone who's refereed a game or four want to pull their hair out. If you get paid for commenting at a hockey game, you should know the rules.
Absolutely.

I know if the U.S. had won that game, there would be a louder outcry regarding the offsides goal, and I would have to say Canadian fans would then have a right to be mad...I know I would be. But I'll say this, after watching thousands of NHL games(like everyone else here I'm sure), that game was a pretty well called affair relatively speaking.

Nordique is online now  
Closed Thread

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:12 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. ©2014 All Rights Reserved.