In the modern era of high-definition cameras and instant replay, the NHL is still trying to figure out how to properly call offside and goalie interference through various replays. The NHL has been inconsistent with the goal calls on the ice, and fans, coaches, and players are all becoming frustrated with the new technology that was supposed to solve these issues.
On Tuesday night in Minnesota, there was another questionable review that took place in regards to offside. Here is the clip:
Wild forward Eric Staal was able to tie up the game with less than 30 seconds remaining on this play. Jason Zucker was the player that appeared to be offside on this play. Here are some close-ups of the play that was under review:
I am not perfect when it comes to the reviews, but this appears to be legitimately offside. I am not a Capitals fan, so I am not playing homer by any means here. I report what I see on the ice, and this play clearly looks offside.
Zucker clearly has no toe on the blueline. There is white ice that separates his skates from the blueline.
I am not sure how the NHL botched this one, but these scenarios are becoming regular occurrences around the NHL daily.
INCONSISTENCIES WITH THE REVIEWS
The goalie interference and offside reviews were supposed to make things better, but they have become one big headache. If the NHL was more consistent in these rulings on the ice, the game would be a lot smoother and easier to watch.
I am all for technological advancements to the game of hockey. If there are cameras that can capture every frame of a play on the ice, they need to be used properly.
What is puzzling to me is the human element inside the game. Who is making these decisions in Toronto? Who is making these decisions on the ice? If there are people inside the game that cannot make these decisions properly, how come they oversee making these tough decisions? If there is evidence that is “inconclusive,” is that the fault of the human or the technology used? Any human would automatically blame the technology first before themselves. However, with the amount of inconsistent reviews that occur weekly, I am beginning to wonder if the inconsistencies are a result of human error.
I am not calling out any particular person out, but this review that took place was cut-and-dry. My eyes are not perfect, but they are good enough to see that this review is cut-and-dry, and the proper call should be made on the ice.
If the NHL cannot find a way to get these calls right more consistently, then there needs to be action taken. If the human element cannot make these calls right, or if the technology is not good enough to determine the outcome of these calls, then maybe it is time to get rid of the reviews completely.
The game went many years without reviews like this and survived. I realize that humans and technology are both not perfect, but these inconsistencies around the league must be reduced. If they are not reduced, clubs will begin to pay the price for them. What is going to happen if a goalie interference or offside review happens in a Game 7 Stanley Cup Final overtime game? One bad or questionable call could cost a team a Stanley Cup Championship. Is this what the NHL wants for the future?
By: George Foussekis
It would help if you read what the NHL put out about it because if you read that, you can see how they interpreted this call and then it makes more sense
https://www.nhl.com/news/situation-room-initiated-challenge-washington-capitals-minnesota-wild/c-288196032?tid=277729160
At 19:33 of the third period in the Capitals/Wild game, the Situation Room initiated a review under the terms of a Coach’s Challenge to examine whether Minnesota was offside prior to Eric Staal’s goal.
After reviewing all available replays and consulting with the linesman, NHL Hockey Operations staff confirmed that Jason Zucker tagged up at the blueline, nullifying the delayed off-side, before the puck touched Jared Spurgeon’s stick inside the attacking zone.
Therefore the original call stands – good goal Minnesota Wild.
George,
With respect to goaltender interference, agree 100%; inconsistencies abound. On this type of offside(or lack thereof), the League has been extremely consistent. In this case the player entering the zone essentially dumped the puck in (albeit a few inches in front of him) and did not cross the Blue line with control. He did not re-touch the puck until after Zucker had checked up. Had he entered with control, or what the linesman deemed control, play would have been offside. There was a play identical to this on March 19th in the Avs/Hawks game, same play and called the same way.
Regardless, as a Caps fan, I was happy to see the show of resiliency in the OT to pull out the win after the momentum had clearly shifted to the Wild after the goal.
According to the rules, “a delayed offside occurs if the puck is passed or shot into the offensive zone while an attacking player is offside”. In this case, the puck was carried into the zone in clear possession by a Minnesota Wild player as another attacking player was in the zone. It is clearly and offside. I simply cannot believe the NHL made this ruling.
Look closer. The Wild player made an outstanding play. Seeing his teammate offsides he clearly lifts his stick just before the blue line allowing the puck to glide into the zone. I’m the view provided the puck is not touching his stick while the player is still offsides. I’m a CAPS fan but more so I am a fan of great hockey awareness.
It wasn’t a pass and it wasn’t a shot that took the puck across the blue line while the other player was in the zone. So it’s offsides.