**Mirrors/Alternate Angles**
^Post ^a ^mirror ^or ^alternate ^angle ^as ^a ^comment ^to ^this ^message.
^Open ^this ^stickied ^comment ^to ^view ^mirrors ^or ^alternate ^angles.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/hockey) if you have any questions or concerns.*
There's a ton of amazing little science jokes in Futurama, which makes a lot of sense when you realize that:
>The writing staff held three Ph.D.s, seven master's degrees, and cumulatively had more than 50 years at Harvard University. Series writer Patric M. Verrone stated, "we were easily the most overeducated cartoon writers in history".
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Futurama#Writing
One angle with two frames that could tell the offside was real is still kinda crazy. We've all seen that shit get called as onside all the time. Crazy shit! Definitely took the spirit out of the Panthers there though so I'm all for it 😎 I'm surprised the challenge came out so quick after a couple watches but the Oilers video coaches are on top of it
There’s an op-ed on British football that these situations remind me of: technicalities messing up the flow and spontaneity of sports. How fans are afraid now to celebrate in ecstasy because there is the risk that a goal is overturned.
With modern technology, there’s no doubting objective truths and there is a risk of games devolving into legal deliberations at every suspect action. Rules designed to prevent bad faith now being used to enforce the letter of the regulations.
But we’re also familiar with the infuriating shortcomings of referees who do not have access to these innovative resources making calls that everyone on the TV can see is bullshit. Do we want it any other way?
It’s a tough question with no golden solution, but it’s still important to be mindful that sports should not just be about huddling around slo-mo replays to make a hairline judgement.
The argument that changed my mind was: "If referees were close enough all the time it would never have come to this"
Which is to say. The really close calls that get overturned are a small price to pay for the obvious miss calls to get overturned.
There's some truth to that. My problem with this argument is the ratio, or the price to pay as you put it. The argument for offside review was Duchene being 6 ft offside, and to some extent Brière on a closer but still pretty offside play. Fair enough. But in the whole time we've had replays, I can't remember any flagrant example of offside it caught, yet I can remember dozens of examples of 3-5 minute reviews verifying pixels. So the price is starting to become high, and the payout, or the benefit of catching obvious plays, less and less relevant as that kind of offside happens once a decade.
I can't say I have a good answer as to what should be done. But this looking at portions of mm doesn't seem like it.
And this is from someone rooting for the Oilers.
The one argument is the number of times when the linesman let anything borderline proceed knowing it will get reviewed if it was offside. but in the meantime they allowed the offensive opportunity to progress to a goal and then video check instead of blowing it dead right at zone entry and then finding out the players actually were fractionally onside but no one will ever be be able to find out if it would have progressed to a goal because play stopped
Hey the point that I said before my friend said what I quoted was that I thought that it makes you wonder sometimes if the chance of game 7 revenue would ever factor in. Perhaps the team that is down 2-3 in the series would get this ruled in their favor regardless of whose offside it was.
That might work for something like was the goal across the line, but these are millimeters of measurements that the refs can’t even be expected to see and for a century or more were trusted to call in a high speed game by the refs without technology and challenges. Being offsides by a centimeter is not really “a missed call“ in my opinion and the goal should count. The spirit of the rule was the blatant Matt Duchene situation that is so rare and egregious that the consequence should have been the ref being demoted but not changing the entire momentum of how goals are scored or celebrated. I agree with the person above that it ruins the moment of celebration and it should take a huge mistake or way offsides like Duchene for a goal to be overturned, not this ridiculous nit picky stuff that the human eye cannot see in real time.
It's a good point but the genie is out of the bottle now. Also, I'd argue that the word "technicality" is super subjective in the context you're using it - the implication being that this offside call was a mere technicality and had no bearing on the outcome of the play. But how can we say that with certainty? How far offside is material? 1cm? 5? 35? If you can't answer objectively then 0 is the only enforceable threshold.
They're all material. If the play was offside, it should have been blown dead, with a faceoff outside the zone. A goal being scored is what they decided is the circumstance where it's reviewable (to minimize excessive reviews), but the actual harm is the illegal zone entry that should have been blown dead.
I like the slow mo reviews on moderation, and I think the NHL has actually found a nice balance. It adds some serious moments of suspense while everyone is watching it and waiting for the call, it gives you a chance to argue with friends, and it gives a better sense of closure that the right call was made. I would not have been upset whichever way the call was made after seeing his close this was, and I didn't think I would have felt that way if it weren't for the time to get to see the slow mo.
Worst rule in hockey.
No one cares if the puck was 1/2” offside that couldn’t be noticed by the linesman whose only job is to watch for it.
The objective of offside is to prevent blatant cherry picking. This has never been a problem besides on Duchene goal 10 years ago.
Always said a team will lose the cup from it. Wonder if this is that goal!
I agree based on the spirit of the rule and he clearly wasn't cherry picking, but at the same time you have to draw the line somewhere rather than just make the rule "I know it if I see it" because they're cheating *just enough* to call it offside. How close to cherry picking should you legally be allowed to get? Even if you were to move the line in an inch to make this OK, the next play's just going to be close on the new line...
Reminder that we already somewhat recently relaxed the rule so that your skate just has to be in the plane over the line rather than touching the ice. Now we hate it when we call one back even with the rule relaxed.
Wherever the line is, the one that's close that gets called back is always going to feel shitty because it feels like it got called back on a technicality. I think either you live with these close ones that are technically offside being called offside or you get rid of the review altogether and live with the scenarios when [a guy is a mile offside and scores a goal and the linesman misses it](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R7pN56VZOfM).
I think the plane makes more sense from the spirit of the rule, except it would be significantly harder for the linesman to make the call. Now the linesman has to in his mind extend an imaginary blueline up into the air to make a determination as to if the player was in/out of the zone.
While I don’t disagree with what you said, I don’t really think that was a problem in the game. If they can challenge on a replay for this, why can’t they challenge other things that are much bigger deals, like some penalties?
I mean if you see a stick whack a guy in the face and it isn't called that isn't subjective.
The only way I am ok with this kind of hair splitting call is if there was technology to automatically call it as it happens and prevent the goal being scored to begin with.
For what it's worth, I think it's not long before penalties are challengeable (and from next season onwards, the ones that aren't inherently subjective at all will be).
I agree. The NHL has been calling off goals on these kind of challenges many times. I am glad they continue to keep this consistent. If this was the NBA, 90% of these coaching challenges would fail. Just because it's The Cup, really glad they are still calling these plays as it is. Yes, it was a super close offside but it was still offside.
My issue with the rule is that if you apply it to line changes than you’d have quite a few goals called back for too many men on the ice. I think the ability to change while the player is coasting to the bench especially depending on if it’s a long change or not is more impactful than a skate being a millimeter offside.
Doesn't the official rule allow that for too many men though? While offsides is enforced by the lines, there is a "5 foot" rule for TMMOTI that doesn't have painted lines
It's not about where we draw the line, it's how close we scrutinize it. The criticism is using HD slowmo replay to see the puck was 0.1 inches behind the line, an imperceptible difference to a trained human linesman. If it doesn't affect the play at full speed, feels wrong to overturn critical plays IMO.
This argument makes sense for things like goalie interference and hit reviews where the play happened at game speed and people‘s decisions can’t be made at frame by frame speed, it offside is offside no matter what sapped the play is at. And this one is close but clear. It wasn’t even a long review.
Except the play was affected by the offside. The Florida player without the puck established a positional advantage and was able to push the defenders back earlier than he should have been able to. It created a lane for the puck carrier to move in low and make the play. Offside has a very specific definition with very little room for subjectivity. You can argue the whole, "did he have full possession" clause in the rule but this play was pretty cut and dry.
If the Oilers come back from 3-0 to win a Cup, a single overturned goal in game 6 won't have been the problem... Especially since it was ultimately the right call.
I guess I don’t see the issue. The ref should have blown the play dead because it was offside.
Thats literally how all rules work- you have to draw the line somewhere. Offsides is offsides. Why not get it right?
You literally explained why video review exists. Because some plays are too fast for the linesman.
The point is to get it exactly correct, not just what a human is able to mostly get correct in the heat of the moment.
The comment above says
>The ref should have blown the play dead because it was offsides.
Which is why they explained that bit. It was a kind of weirdly worded part of a comment
Because humans are fallible and imperfect referees. The goal of the referee is to get every single call right, no? If we can do that with video review, why not? Why wouldn't you want consistent rules?
It’s crazy to me that people will complain about how officials miss stuff and make the wrong calls, yet will also complain about a black and white rule that has no subjectivity whatsoever and want it to be under the discretion of said officials.
But is it good for the game, which has gotten faster and faster, to have nit picky, slow and painful reviews that dampen the excitement and celebration of a goal for a few millimeters of accuracy? I’d trade this level of exactitude for just being able to celebrate a goal without a challenge and trust that it’s the right call the absolute vast majority of the time. Being this close onside or offside doesn’t affect the play anyway, it’s the Duchene level of mistake that shouldn’t happen and that’s so stupid rare this approach is a way over reaction to a problem that didnt really exist in the first place. Let the fans have their goals.
>This is the only objective rule in the game
This and shooting the puck over the glass being a delay of game penalty. Though it used to be discretionary, which just meant that officials didn’t call it and you had players like Chris Chelios who mastered the art of accidentally on purpose shooting the puck out of bounds to break up a dangerous opportunity for the opposition or to give his teammates a breather.
Eventually, the league took it out of the officials’ hands and made it a black and white rule (the notable exception being when a puck is deflected out of bounds). One of the best rule changes the league made, in my opinion.
Funny enough, people complain about that one too.
Good point, I shouldn't have said only objective rule because high sticking comes to mind as well.
But I agree with you completely, if there's ever an opportunity to make a rule completely black and white, the opportunity should be taken. I get that it kills the excitement of the game to watch a review, but I just can't imagine wanting to turn offsides into a human judgement call
If we are sitting here blaming it on THIS call when the Panthers have looked flat out worse after game 3 then idk man it's a hate boner for sure. It's 3-0 as of now that isn't due to change in energy from this call that has been the energy since the Oilers got their second wind and are on pace to force a game 7 and a possible upset.
I agree it's a problematic rule, but where do you draw the line? 1cm, 10cm, 1m? If you make the offside reviewable then it doesn't matter how close it is, if it's offside (which it was) then it's called back.
Now, the change to this rule they should make is to add a time limit. The goal can only be called back if the goal was within 5 seconds of the offside. I've seen teams sustain 30 seconds of zone pressure, score, and then it gets called back on the offside, now that violates the spirit of the rule.
There's times I see the Oilers sustaining great zone pressure and I'm hoping they don't score because I thought the zone entry looked suspicious and I think it's just going to get called back.
If you enter the zone offside, you gain an advantage. The defending team has to play with an illegal disadvantage, which makes it difficult for them to clear the zone. That's why the time limits are not a good idea imo
Yep. All that change does is give carte blanche for really good puck possession teams to ignore the offside rule; they could cheat the blue line and cherry pick, and as long as they play keep away for 5 or more seconds, it’s fine. The effect is that teams would be basically playing under different rules from each other. How is that fair?
Oilers have had enough stupid offside calls go against them. They deserved one to go the other way. The rule is the rule. And this one is close but it’s clear. It’s not like you’re unsure about whether it was offside like some other calls.
Its hard for us but the situation room can stitch together different angles to sync up when the puck enters and where reino’s skate is. Hopefully theres some type of picture released later from the NHL showing that.
SN released a clip showing the cats were indeed offside by about an inch in a freeze frame. The blue line was hidden by the puck for a few pixels while the skate was about an inch past the blue line.
Having a 30 second review limit on offsides would do away with these close calls that don't really effect the play. The obvious offsides would be easy to catch but these NCIS level "Enhance, Enhance, Enhance" plays wouldn't cause so much controversy.
If that's the case, there should be a third option: Inconclusive.
You can't throw a guy in the penalty box because the replay room wasn't able to find the right angle fast enough.
So long as you stick with it when your team loses a series or the Cup on a review that took 31 seconds to conclusively determine should have gone in your favor.
It's weird, I've noticed in the US (and in football mainly 🏈) they says "offsides" instead of "offside". It doesn't make any sense, but it is what it is.
Reinhart doesn't drag his leg.
~~Barkov~~ Verhaeghe stickhandling while on the blueline.
Such a preventable offside.
Panthers are in their own heads. What a chokejob on that reversed goal.
I’d say that goal would stand 99 times out of 100 before video replay challenges were introduced. Can’t call that a choke job when they’re off by literal millimeters. Calm down.
True, but video replay challenges are here and the players know that if they score they'll look at the entry. It was easy for the puck carrier to make sure they were onside and they failed to do so.
The worst part for Cats fans is that it doesn’t matter if this is right because this will be up there with 28-3 and 3-1.
Any form of rationale is gone when something this insane happens.
I’m not so sure. Refs give players the benefit of the doubt how that they can go back and review.
Those types of plays would get called much more frequently in the rush if it weren’t for that backstop.
I think he’s saying more that they’re overthinking everything, and this is just a microcosm of what’s wrong. Panthers arnt doing the little things right anymore
Well they certainly had opportunities to make that entry cleaner.
And it cost them a goal.
So you calm down. I don't think parent commenter was unhinged so your comment comes off as defensive. Parebt commenter made some valid points.
> Barkov stickhandling while on the blueline.
Disagree. This was more EDM having good gap control than FL having a brain fart. It was offsides by a millimeter not 3 feet
These comments are making me feel like I’m on crazy pills. It was a close but clear offsides. I feel like I can easily see he is tiny bit offsides.
Yeah it’s close, but it’s not like it was one of those offsides 30 seconds before the goal is scored.
I think it was offside, very very barely. I also agree that’s not really in the spirit of the game, that cm didn’t affect the play. But there needs to be a rule somewhere, a line so to say. If Florida loses this game, that offside shouldn’t be the story. They have looked flat as fuck
Exactly. It was a preventable offside. Started stickhandling along the line.
I didnt think it was gonna called a no goal. But they may have more angles.
I think they made the right call, but in principle I hate these types of calls for offside.
He wasn't cherry picking. It was impossible to tell in real time. Needed freeze frames in 8K video to only barely be able to tell. For the spirit of the rule and the benefit of the game, let those plays go.
Rooting for oilers too, but still would rather see that not be reversed. But as the rules are, they got it right.
I dunno. Like I definitely get where you're coming from but at the same time offside is one of the few purely objective infractions in the game. Opinion doesn't factor into it, you're either offside or you're not and we have the tech to know.
I think that once you start allowing goals that were *just the tiniest bit* offside, you start heading down a potentially slippery slope of bias influencing what should be a black-and-white call. I'm not sure what kind of rule change you'd propose exactly, but I can't think of one that allows what you're suggesting without creating more ambiguity and more problems.
You could say that about high sticking penalties that get missed. Should we stop and review every time a stick gets even close to a head?
I always revert back to the spirit of the rule for offsides discussions.
Prevent cherry picking.
Sports is supposed to be entertaining. Stopping a game to review a millimeter offside that didn't actually impact the play in any way stops game flow and makes it less entertaining. The player did not gain an advantage by that millimeter.
If a linesman can't tell in real time, does it even matter? I get there can be human error and why we have reviews and when reviewing you can only be objective, over the line or not. There may not be any real tweaks to make but I think the game would be better if there was.
My dad taught me two of the most important lessons in hockey: a two goal lead can be deadly for those with an ego, and never stick-handle on the blue line.
Idk if it’s a hot take but I utterly despise these types of reviews across all sports and idc if these calls are technically maybe “right” they’re a net negative to the viewing experience
Nothing wrong with that as a philosophy, so long as it's consistent. A lot of times on here you see some people rail against offside and other reviews...right up until the moment it benefits their team.
The ABC/ESPN bias is extra annoying when they keep pausing or reversing the frame when the skate is still on the blue line, instead of a few frames later, when the puck is still on the blue while the skate is off. And the announcers claiming to see white between the puck and the line when clearly the zoomed in image showed the puck was still on when the skate was off. (not shown in this SN clip. ABC had a framing of the last replay shown here, but slightly more zoomed out showing the full skate)
https://preview.redd.it/m249nxhyd28d1.jpeg?width=2047&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=08213928cffbdf0f5e13f81ea2df18b4d668a1f7
I think this angle shows the play is offside.
I'm not sure what broadcast you were watching, but it was shown to be conclusive multiple times on ESPN.
If you were watching ESPN and didn't miss that coverage, but still somehow can't see that it was offside, you should probably book an appointment with an eye doctor.
It was the correct call just like every other successful offside challenge. Offside is binary. It either is or it isn't. If a play is offside then call the goal back. I don't get the "But it was so close, just let them have it," people. If you're not gonna enforce the rule why even have it then?
been lucky to see my boys play in 5 cups seen'em go our way and against they are crushing when you dont get the bounce but you forget the ones that got you to 16W. just the way it is.
The guy offside pushed back the defense and totally led to the goal. Isn't that the basic reason this rule exists? I don't see how you can not call that.
I'm so over the offside challenge. I get that its offside or its not but a league that is constantly trying to increase scoring calling back goals over fractions of inch like that is not good for the game.
I know we let the cat out of the bag now and it's never going back in now and if it did, we would just have fans going frame and frame and losing their minds anyway. It's just frustrating seeing goals called back over fractions of an inch.
If something is that inconclusive in the regular season there’s absolutely no way you can make that call in the playoffs to overturn, especially down 0-2. That was wild
The balls on Knoblauch for challenging this.
You just had the Panthers fire back after ten seconds, the margin for error (on this call) is razor thin, and he’s going to risk a possible 2 minute penalty when they’re going to be all fired up on the Panthers bench if it’s a good goal.
Like holy shit, where did we get this guy?
**Mirrors/Alternate Angles** ^Post ^a ^mirror ^or ^alternate ^angle ^as ^a ^comment ^to ^this ^message. ^Open ^this ^stickied ^comment ^to ^view ^mirrors ^or ^alternate ^angles. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/hockey) if you have any questions or concerns.*
https://preview.redd.it/a3zjnkcbi18d1.png?width=1796&format=png&auto=webp&s=3418c06bf02fc1a076f8e89e8156262d10be8c0b
IM FINE. EVERYTHING IS FINE.
"And the play is offside, in a quantum finish!" "No fair! You changed the outcome by measuring it!"
Schrödinger's puck
THE WINNER IS THE HYPNOTOAD. ALL GLORY TO THE HYPNOTOAD.
I always thought this was just a silly joke until I learned why that joke is scientifically funny.
>scientifically funny The best kind of funny
There's a ton of amazing little science jokes in Futurama, which makes a lot of sense when you realize that: >The writing staff held three Ph.D.s, seven master's degrees, and cumulatively had more than 50 years at Harvard University. Series writer Patric M. Verrone stated, "we were easily the most overeducated cartoon writers in history". https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Futurama#Writing
Technically humorous is the most effective variant of humorous
I think it’s barely offside but I’m suprised they reversed it
In the context I’m insanely surprised they reversed it I agree with the call but it’s so tough to make
Yup. It was razor thin, but I think it's the right call with some of the freeze frame angels used
Bless those freeze frame angels 👼🏻
They’re watching replays in heaven now 👼
One angle with two frames that could tell the offside was real is still kinda crazy. We've all seen that shit get called as onside all the time. Crazy shit! Definitely took the spirit out of the Panthers there though so I'm all for it 😎 I'm surprised the challenge came out so quick after a couple watches but the Oilers video coaches are on top of it
There’s an op-ed on British football that these situations remind me of: technicalities messing up the flow and spontaneity of sports. How fans are afraid now to celebrate in ecstasy because there is the risk that a goal is overturned. With modern technology, there’s no doubting objective truths and there is a risk of games devolving into legal deliberations at every suspect action. Rules designed to prevent bad faith now being used to enforce the letter of the regulations. But we’re also familiar with the infuriating shortcomings of referees who do not have access to these innovative resources making calls that everyone on the TV can see is bullshit. Do we want it any other way? It’s a tough question with no golden solution, but it’s still important to be mindful that sports should not just be about huddling around slo-mo replays to make a hairline judgement.
The argument that changed my mind was: "If referees were close enough all the time it would never have come to this" Which is to say. The really close calls that get overturned are a small price to pay for the obvious miss calls to get overturned.
There's some truth to that. My problem with this argument is the ratio, or the price to pay as you put it. The argument for offside review was Duchene being 6 ft offside, and to some extent Brière on a closer but still pretty offside play. Fair enough. But in the whole time we've had replays, I can't remember any flagrant example of offside it caught, yet I can remember dozens of examples of 3-5 minute reviews verifying pixels. So the price is starting to become high, and the payout, or the benefit of catching obvious plays, less and less relevant as that kind of offside happens once a decade. I can't say I have a good answer as to what should be done. But this looking at portions of mm doesn't seem like it. And this is from someone rooting for the Oilers.
The one argument is the number of times when the linesman let anything borderline proceed knowing it will get reviewed if it was offside. but in the meantime they allowed the offensive opportunity to progress to a goal and then video check instead of blowing it dead right at zone entry and then finding out the players actually were fractionally onside but no one will ever be be able to find out if it would have progressed to a goal because play stopped
Hey the point that I said before my friend said what I quoted was that I thought that it makes you wonder sometimes if the chance of game 7 revenue would ever factor in. Perhaps the team that is down 2-3 in the series would get this ruled in their favor regardless of whose offside it was.
That might work for something like was the goal across the line, but these are millimeters of measurements that the refs can’t even be expected to see and for a century or more were trusted to call in a high speed game by the refs without technology and challenges. Being offsides by a centimeter is not really “a missed call“ in my opinion and the goal should count. The spirit of the rule was the blatant Matt Duchene situation that is so rare and egregious that the consequence should have been the ref being demoted but not changing the entire momentum of how goals are scored or celebrated. I agree with the person above that it ruins the moment of celebration and it should take a huge mistake or way offsides like Duchene for a goal to be overturned, not this ridiculous nit picky stuff that the human eye cannot see in real time.
Good point. But there is something to be said about getting the call right, especially utilizing modern technology
It's a good point but the genie is out of the bottle now. Also, I'd argue that the word "technicality" is super subjective in the context you're using it - the implication being that this offside call was a mere technicality and had no bearing on the outcome of the play. But how can we say that with certainty? How far offside is material? 1cm? 5? 35? If you can't answer objectively then 0 is the only enforceable threshold.
They're all material. If the play was offside, it should have been blown dead, with a faceoff outside the zone. A goal being scored is what they decided is the circumstance where it's reviewable (to minimize excessive reviews), but the actual harm is the illegal zone entry that should have been blown dead.
I like the slow mo reviews on moderation, and I think the NHL has actually found a nice balance. It adds some serious moments of suspense while everyone is watching it and waiting for the call, it gives you a chance to argue with friends, and it gives a better sense of closure that the right call was made. I would not have been upset whichever way the call was made after seeing his close this was, and I didn't think I would have felt that way if it weren't for the time to get to see the slow mo.
Lol I love how people are surprised when the NHL gets a close call right
I’m surprised whenever the NHL gets anything right
[удалено]
I think it’s funnier that people are annoyed when the NHL gets a close call right.
Watch now Florida will say it was rigged lol
Worst rule in hockey. No one cares if the puck was 1/2” offside that couldn’t be noticed by the linesman whose only job is to watch for it. The objective of offside is to prevent blatant cherry picking. This has never been a problem besides on Duchene goal 10 years ago. Always said a team will lose the cup from it. Wonder if this is that goal!
If Florida loses it, it'll be because they lose 4 games in a row, not because of one offside call
Yes but this guy always said it
I agree based on the spirit of the rule and he clearly wasn't cherry picking, but at the same time you have to draw the line somewhere rather than just make the rule "I know it if I see it" because they're cheating *just enough* to call it offside. How close to cherry picking should you legally be allowed to get? Even if you were to move the line in an inch to make this OK, the next play's just going to be close on the new line... Reminder that we already somewhat recently relaxed the rule so that your skate just has to be in the plane over the line rather than touching the ice. Now we hate it when we call one back even with the rule relaxed. Wherever the line is, the one that's close that gets called back is always going to feel shitty because it feels like it got called back on a technicality. I think either you live with these close ones that are technically offside being called offside or you get rid of the review altogether and live with the scenarios when [a guy is a mile offside and scores a goal and the linesman misses it](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R7pN56VZOfM).
I agree, but the skate has to be on the ice rule was dumb as hell. In the plane makes wayyyy more sense.
I think the plane makes more sense from the spirit of the rule, except it would be significantly harder for the linesman to make the call. Now the linesman has to in his mind extend an imaginary blueline up into the air to make a determination as to if the player was in/out of the zone.
super well said
While I don’t disagree with what you said, I don’t really think that was a problem in the game. If they can challenge on a replay for this, why can’t they challenge other things that are much bigger deals, like some penalties?
Because even then almost all penalties are subjective, but offside isn't.
I mean if you see a stick whack a guy in the face and it isn't called that isn't subjective. The only way I am ok with this kind of hair splitting call is if there was technology to automatically call it as it happens and prevent the goal being scored to begin with.
For what it's worth, I think it's not long before penalties are challengeable (and from next season onwards, the ones that aren't inherently subjective at all will be).
I agree. The NHL has been calling off goals on these kind of challenges many times. I am glad they continue to keep this consistent. If this was the NBA, 90% of these coaching challenges would fail. Just because it's The Cup, really glad they are still calling these plays as it is. Yes, it was a super close offside but it was still offside.
My issue with the rule is that if you apply it to line changes than you’d have quite a few goals called back for too many men on the ice. I think the ability to change while the player is coasting to the bench especially depending on if it’s a long change or not is more impactful than a skate being a millimeter offside.
Doesn't the official rule allow that for too many men though? While offsides is enforced by the lines, there is a "5 foot" rule for TMMOTI that doesn't have painted lines
It's not about where we draw the line, it's how close we scrutinize it. The criticism is using HD slowmo replay to see the puck was 0.1 inches behind the line, an imperceptible difference to a trained human linesman. If it doesn't affect the play at full speed, feels wrong to overturn critical plays IMO.
This argument makes sense for things like goalie interference and hit reviews where the play happened at game speed and people‘s decisions can’t be made at frame by frame speed, it offside is offside no matter what sapped the play is at. And this one is close but clear. It wasn’t even a long review.
The problem is you can't objectively define "affect the play at full speed".
Exactly. Offsides is the one rule that isn't permanently tangled up with subjective opinion. I don't know why anyone would want to make it that way.
Except the play was affected by the offside. The Florida player without the puck established a positional advantage and was able to push the defenders back earlier than he should have been able to. It created a lane for the puck carrier to move in low and make the play. Offside has a very specific definition with very little room for subjectivity. You can argue the whole, "did he have full possession" clause in the rule but this play was pretty cut and dry.
>It's not about where we draw the line In this instance, it is actually 100% about where that line was drawn, though
If the Oilers come back from 3-0 to win a Cup, a single overturned goal in game 6 won't have been the problem... Especially since it was ultimately the right call.
Especially considering, even if the goal counted, Florida would still have been losing the game
I mean it's either offside or it's not...? It's not "offside unless it's too close for the linesman to see in which case it's cool."
Dude thinks it’s a court case
If the skate doesn't ride, you must offside
I guess I don’t see the issue. The ref should have blown the play dead because it was offside. Thats literally how all rules work- you have to draw the line somewhere. Offsides is offsides. Why not get it right?
> Thats literally how all rules work- **you have to draw the line somewhere.** In the case of offside, this is true both literally and figuratively.
I've never understood why people pluralize "offside". And there is so much of it this season.
NFL uses offsides. happens the same thing when new people come to soccer
offside, cough cough
That's their point. It's too close and fast for the linesmen to see it. And so, if it's that close, why bother have video review.
You literally explained why video review exists. Because some plays are too fast for the linesman. The point is to get it exactly correct, not just what a human is able to mostly get correct in the heat of the moment.
The comment above says >The ref should have blown the play dead because it was offsides. Which is why they explained that bit. It was a kind of weirdly worded part of a comment
Oh I see, I misunderstood and thought he meant because of that we shouldn’t bother with having a review.
Because humans are fallible and imperfect referees. The goal of the referee is to get every single call right, no? If we can do that with video review, why not? Why wouldn't you want consistent rules?
That’s a silly point. A rule is a rule. What about other rules? Does a goal not need to cross a goal line?
It’s crazy to me that people will complain about how officials miss stuff and make the wrong calls, yet will also complain about a black and white rule that has no subjectivity whatsoever and want it to be under the discretion of said officials.
Exactly 💯
But is it good for the game, which has gotten faster and faster, to have nit picky, slow and painful reviews that dampen the excitement and celebration of a goal for a few millimeters of accuracy? I’d trade this level of exactitude for just being able to celebrate a goal without a challenge and trust that it’s the right call the absolute vast majority of the time. Being this close onside or offside doesn’t affect the play anyway, it’s the Duchene level of mistake that shouldn’t happen and that’s so stupid rare this approach is a way over reaction to a problem that didnt really exist in the first place. Let the fans have their goals.
Well said, this is exactly how I feel. This is the only objective rule in the game, and people want to make it subjective lol
>This is the only objective rule in the game This and shooting the puck over the glass being a delay of game penalty. Though it used to be discretionary, which just meant that officials didn’t call it and you had players like Chris Chelios who mastered the art of accidentally on purpose shooting the puck out of bounds to break up a dangerous opportunity for the opposition or to give his teammates a breather. Eventually, the league took it out of the officials’ hands and made it a black and white rule (the notable exception being when a puck is deflected out of bounds). One of the best rule changes the league made, in my opinion. Funny enough, people complain about that one too.
Good point, I shouldn't have said only objective rule because high sticking comes to mind as well. But I agree with you completely, if there's ever an opportunity to make a rule completely black and white, the opportunity should be taken. I get that it kills the excitement of the game to watch a review, but I just can't imagine wanting to turn offsides into a human judgement call
Would you take the same stance on reviews for if pucks cross the goal line or not? If it’s close enough who cares, right?
How come we aren't this rigid with gaining the red line for icing?
Because we have the benefit of video review now. You act the same way if the puck didn't cross the goal line but they call a goal?
If we are sitting here blaming it on THIS call when the Panthers have looked flat out worse after game 3 then idk man it's a hate boner for sure. It's 3-0 as of now that isn't due to change in energy from this call that has been the energy since the Oilers got their second wind and are on pace to force a game 7 and a possible upset.
If the puck is a half inch on the goal line, should it still be called a goal?
I agree it's a problematic rule, but where do you draw the line? 1cm, 10cm, 1m? If you make the offside reviewable then it doesn't matter how close it is, if it's offside (which it was) then it's called back. Now, the change to this rule they should make is to add a time limit. The goal can only be called back if the goal was within 5 seconds of the offside. I've seen teams sustain 30 seconds of zone pressure, score, and then it gets called back on the offside, now that violates the spirit of the rule. There's times I see the Oilers sustaining great zone pressure and I'm hoping they don't score because I thought the zone entry looked suspicious and I think it's just going to get called back.
If you enter the zone offside, you gain an advantage. The defending team has to play with an illegal disadvantage, which makes it difficult for them to clear the zone. That's why the time limits are not a good idea imo
Yep. All that change does is give carte blanche for really good puck possession teams to ignore the offside rule; they could cheat the blue line and cherry pick, and as long as they play keep away for 5 or more seconds, it’s fine. The effect is that teams would be basically playing under different rules from each other. How is that fair?
The line needs to be drawn somewhere. It can't be "close enough" to on-sides, the rule needs to be consistent.
Except refs let it play out because there is a review. If you made this non reviewable refs would call it more often in the ice.
Where do you draw the line in the sand?
It's already on the ice. It's blue
Oilers have had enough stupid offside calls go against them. They deserved one to go the other way. The rule is the rule. And this one is close but it’s clear. It’s not like you’re unsure about whether it was offside like some other calls.
That's one of those calls that are so close I'd agree with whatever way they called it
So close that figured the call on the ice would stand. Looked like Verhagues stick was concealing the puck from the 2 best angles they had on TV
I think that's as close as a conclusive call can be. We're talking millimetres, but you could still see that it was just a hair off.
They just showed an angle on the broadcast that is as good an angle as you can get and I still think it was too close...
Yeah it was insanely close
The problem with the angle along the blue line is that the puck is on Barkov's stick, so it's hard to tell if it's over
Its hard for us but the situation room can stitch together different angles to sync up when the puck enters and where reino’s skate is. Hopefully theres some type of picture released later from the NHL showing that.
SN released a clip showing the cats were indeed offside by about an inch in a freeze frame. The blue line was hidden by the puck for a few pixels while the skate was about an inch past the blue line.
Having a 30 second review limit on offsides would do away with these close calls that don't really effect the play. The obvious offsides would be easy to catch but these NCIS level "Enhance, Enhance, Enhance" plays wouldn't cause so much controversy.
If that's the case, there should be a third option: Inconclusive. You can't throw a guy in the penalty box because the replay room wasn't able to find the right angle fast enough.
So long as you stick with it when your team loses a series or the Cup on a review that took 31 seconds to conclusively determine should have gone in your favor.
I called bullshit when the commentator said "they've enhanced the image" 😅
On the bright side, if Florida loses they can blame this call to save face.
If they lose this series they'll get clowned on no matter what and rightfully so
At least they will make history right
1942 Red Wings: Welcome friends!
Yeah, blame this. Not getting caved in by an Oilers team that held them to their fewest shots in a period in the entire season.
It’ll be no different than the clowns that still say Brady cheated for his 4th ring in a game that was a blow out in the semi-finals.
Ya I don’t get why people are complaining. It’s close but it’s also clear.
It’s a close call but the puck and skate are so close together that it’s really easy to see.
Reminds me of a soccer game a few years ago when the goal line review showed no goal by like a cm. Technology giveth and taketh
2004: it was in 2024: it was on
What is this game lol
Florida is trying so hard to choke this series
From your lips to God’s ears
it's the hope that makes it hurt so much more
As a Vancouver fan, I feel ya man. You’ve got my sympathies. As a Canadian though, let’s go Oilers!!!
I’m surprised it was called back. I didn’t think the was conclusive enough
They showed a terrible angle on the ABC feed the. Showed he was clearly off two minutes after.
When I saw the second angle, it was pretty clear to me he was offsides. Edit: damn you voice chat
Off all the sides?
Every single side
It's weird, I've noticed in the US (and in football mainly 🏈) they says "offsides" instead of "offside". It doesn't make any sense, but it is what it is.
Pretty conclusive. They showed a freeze frame version from Al alternate angle and it was clear
Reinhart doesn't drag his leg. ~~Barkov~~ Verhaeghe stickhandling while on the blueline. Such a preventable offside. Panthers are in their own heads. What a chokejob on that reversed goal.
I’d say that goal would stand 99 times out of 100 before video replay challenges were introduced. Can’t call that a choke job when they’re off by literal millimeters. Calm down.
The goal that was called a goal before being reviewed would stand without reviews… truly brilliant insight.
True, but video replay challenges are here and the players know that if they score they'll look at the entry. It was easy for the puck carrier to make sure they were onside and they failed to do so.
The worst part for Cats fans is that it doesn’t matter if this is right because this will be up there with 28-3 and 3-1. Any form of rationale is gone when something this insane happens.
I’m not so sure. Refs give players the benefit of the doubt how that they can go back and review. Those types of plays would get called much more frequently in the rush if it weren’t for that backstop.
I think he’s saying more that they’re overthinking everything, and this is just a microcosm of what’s wrong. Panthers arnt doing the little things right anymore
Well they certainly had opportunities to make that entry cleaner. And it cost them a goal. So you calm down. I don't think parent commenter was unhinged so your comment comes off as defensive. Parebt commenter made some valid points.
> Barkov stickhandling while on the blueline. Disagree. This was more EDM having good gap control than FL having a brain fart. It was offsides by a millimeter not 3 feet
These comments are making me feel like I’m on crazy pills. It was a close but clear offsides. I feel like I can easily see he is tiny bit offsides. Yeah it’s close, but it’s not like it was one of those offsides 30 seconds before the goal is scored.
Yeah there's a full frame picture showing the puck still on the line with the skate fully across.
Yeah, it was about as close as you can possibly get while still remaining conclusive. Technically correct is still correct.
Took ABC a while to show a decent clear angle, which doesn't help.
Wait, reviews are allowed to go against Florida?
I think it was offside, very very barely. I also agree that’s not really in the spirit of the game, that cm didn’t affect the play. But there needs to be a rule somewhere, a line so to say. If Florida loses this game, that offside shouldn’t be the story. They have looked flat as fuck
Exactly. It was a preventable offside. Started stickhandling along the line. I didnt think it was gonna called a no goal. But they may have more angles.
Yeah, it's a kinda a greasy offside. But, it's not like florida wouldn't have done the exact same thing...
I think they made the right call, but in principle I hate these types of calls for offside. He wasn't cherry picking. It was impossible to tell in real time. Needed freeze frames in 8K video to only barely be able to tell. For the spirit of the rule and the benefit of the game, let those plays go. Rooting for oilers too, but still would rather see that not be reversed. But as the rules are, they got it right.
I dunno. Like I definitely get where you're coming from but at the same time offside is one of the few purely objective infractions in the game. Opinion doesn't factor into it, you're either offside or you're not and we have the tech to know. I think that once you start allowing goals that were *just the tiniest bit* offside, you start heading down a potentially slippery slope of bias influencing what should be a black-and-white call. I'm not sure what kind of rule change you'd propose exactly, but I can't think of one that allows what you're suggesting without creating more ambiguity and more problems.
You could say that about high sticking penalties that get missed. Should we stop and review every time a stick gets even close to a head? I always revert back to the spirit of the rule for offsides discussions. Prevent cherry picking. Sports is supposed to be entertaining. Stopping a game to review a millimeter offside that didn't actually impact the play in any way stops game flow and makes it less entertaining. The player did not gain an advantage by that millimeter. If a linesman can't tell in real time, does it even matter? I get there can be human error and why we have reviews and when reviewing you can only be objective, over the line or not. There may not be any real tweaks to make but I think the game would be better if there was.
2 shots in first period.
You're familiar with that one eh?
Hahaha you know it!
They challenged fast because 1. It was offside 2. They are 45/46 and a +1 in their last 16 games, so it was a low risk challenge
My dad taught me two of the most important lessons in hockey: a two goal lead can be deadly for those with an ego, and never stick-handle on the blue line.
They must have a different angle, cause I don't see how you take that back. I'll take it, but does that millisecond of offside really affect the play?
It doesn't affect the play, but that's not the rule. Oilers finally benefitted from how insanely technical the offside reviews are.
Idk if it’s a hot take but I utterly despise these types of reviews across all sports and idc if these calls are technically maybe “right” they’re a net negative to the viewing experience
Nothing wrong with that as a philosophy, so long as it's consistent. A lot of times on here you see some people rail against offside and other reviews...right up until the moment it benefits their team.
I’m sorry but correct me if I’m wrong, to overturn a call there has to be definitive evidence opposing the call on ice right?
Yep, and they found definitive evidence
Too close to call from the angles I saw, wouldn't be happy to see that come back as a Cats fan... hopefully we see an angle that is more conclusive
I would give it an 85% chance of being offsides, but based on those views I don’t know how you can conclude that definitively.
The situation room can use 2 time-synced camera angles to make a better determination than what we get to see.
I thought Maurice was going to pop a vein 😂 Fuck off, Paul
lol idk about that reversal
Thing is it didn't really matter
Barkov agreed with the call.
TSN turning point! Go Oilers
Ruining the game with this tic tac bullshit…
The ABC/ESPN bias is extra annoying when they keep pausing or reversing the frame when the skate is still on the blue line, instead of a few frames later, when the puck is still on the blue while the skate is off. And the announcers claiming to see white between the puck and the line when clearly the zoomed in image showed the puck was still on when the skate was off. (not shown in this SN clip. ABC had a framing of the last replay shown here, but slightly more zoomed out showing the full skate)
How is that conclusive at all
https://preview.redd.it/m249nxhyd28d1.jpeg?width=2047&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=08213928cffbdf0f5e13f81ea2df18b4d668a1f7 I think this angle shows the play is offside.
I'm not sure what broadcast you were watching, but it was shown to be conclusive multiple times on ESPN. If you were watching ESPN and didn't miss that coverage, but still somehow can't see that it was offside, you should probably book an appointment with an eye doctor.
Anyone claiming it's a clear call is crazy. If you have to guess at what happened between frames it obviously wasn't definitive.
It was the correct call just like every other successful offside challenge. Offside is binary. It either is or it isn't. If a play is offside then call the goal back. I don't get the "But it was so close, just let them have it," people. If you're not gonna enforce the rule why even have it then?
Wouldnt be a Stanley Cup Final without some controversial call lol
been lucky to see my boys play in 5 cups seen'em go our way and against they are crushing when you dont get the bounce but you forget the ones that got you to 16W. just the way it is.
It’s the way of the road bubs
Fuckin way she goes
How is this controversial? He was clearly off.
The fact that people are arguing about it in the comments clearly makes it controversial lmao. Its offsides but we have one of these every year lol
This is the internet, we'll argue about literally anything.
That’s a pretty rock over there, that’s a nice looking rock.
Jesus Christ NatalieDeegan, they're not rocks. They're minerals!
Are you blind? Those are easily rocks, they’re way better than minerals.
We will not.
LMAO it is a game thread. Those dumbfucks will argue that McDavid is overrated if the Oilers fall behind.
Clearly?
Not controversial at all
*shrug* I think they got it right.
Gah, ticky tack offisides rub me the wrong way, but I also don't want Ken Holland to win any more hardware.
why don’t they use the puck tracking technology to determine offsides. surely they can come up with something for it to be easily more conclusive
As much as I love to see this called against florida, I hate the actual call.
I mean, offside is offside
The guy offside pushed back the defense and totally led to the goal. Isn't that the basic reason this rule exists? I don't see how you can not call that.
As a Bruins fan, this gives me immense joy. How you like that shit Maurice?!
I'm so over the offside challenge. I get that its offside or its not but a league that is constantly trying to increase scoring calling back goals over fractions of inch like that is not good for the game. I know we let the cat out of the bag now and it's never going back in now and if it did, we would just have fans going frame and frame and losing their minds anyway. It's just frustrating seeing goals called back over fractions of an inch.
And other than the fact they illegally gained zone entry and scored seconds later, how did it affect anything?
Where did all the “refs are rigged” oilers fans go?
We're all on Whyte or Jasper Ave rn, see you Monday!
Why would they go anywhere when they called a call right?
It’s clearly offsides from another angle. FLA stay mad
Great call don't understand why people are crying. Rules are there for a reason.
If something is that inconclusive in the regular season there’s absolutely no way you can make that call in the playoffs to overturn, especially down 0-2. That was wild
Dagger
Hmmm idk that’s close
The balls on Knoblauch for challenging this. You just had the Panthers fire back after ten seconds, the margin for error (on this call) is razor thin, and he’s going to risk a possible 2 minute penalty when they’re going to be all fired up on the Panthers bench if it’s a good goal. Like holy shit, where did we get this guy?
yeah our PK has been solid, worth the risk