Video review > Refs?

Question

Why doesn't the NHL start using video review to call games? A ref gets to see the play once from one perspective while cameras can capture every angle possible in HD quality and the play can be reviewed as much as needed. Why does the NHL leave the human capacity for error in the game when it comes to reffing? Imo, just leave a couple refs on the ice for face offs, obvious calls, etc. but otherwise review the video to make the calls. What do you guys think about this?

Answer 1

the game would take way too long  NHL feels that the calls made by the refs are correct 90% of the time and they are satisfied with that.  There are specific calls that are addressed by the War Room at Toronto office they have many camera angles and several appointed officials that watch all the games at once and then make the calls.  This works so far and the system and its bugs are checked and reviewed every year in order to request any changes in the system.

90% accuracy is the officially accepted correct call percentage over the history of the sport  including games that were officiated  prior to video replays and such

Answer 2

Have you seen what play reviews and coaches' challenges have done for football? As the saying goes, "things were better when they were worse." I say keep it how it is with the refs making most of the calls (questionable goals being an exception).

Answer 3

I'm thinking maybe review it but continue play while it's being reviewed maybe.  Also, not in regulation games but in the playoffs only.

Answer 4

The human element is part of officiating in every sport.  Remember when they tried to use technology to rule balls in or out in tennis?  It seems like it would be the perfect way to use technology in sports yet it failed miserably.  Have you ever heard about the system in place to track the accuracy of baseball umpires balls and strikes?  I believe it is still in place but it is not discussed much any more.  They found that umpires were changing their strike zones to match what the machines wanted and it drew the ire of both offensive and defensive teams.  What you are proposing would be impossible to put into place and make it impossible to finish a game.

An officiating crew literally make thousands of decisions each game.  Every time the puck crosses the blue line they make a decision.  Every time there is a body check there is a decision made.  Every time there is a shot on net, they make a decision.  Their accuracy is over 99%.  You hear fans, players and coaches gripe about one or two calls every game.

The ultimate objective of the game is to score goals.  They have video review in place for goals because of that.  The officials are not perfect, nor do they claim to be.  Hockey is one of the most difficult games to officiate and these guys are better at calling their game than officials of just about any other sport.

I am not a big fan of your idea.

Quiet: The accuracy of the officials is far, far higher than 90%.

Dimas: Why should the rules change once the playoffs start?

Dimas: I was referring to carrying penalties over from one game to another.  Here is a hypothetical situation that might change your opinion.  The Flyers are losing to the Penguins in game 5.  They decide that if they aren't going to win it all, they are going to make it as difficult as possible for the Penguins from winning it all too.  They start a line brawl with 15 seconds left against Crosby's line so that Crosby, Malkin, Gonchar, etc. sit 4:45 of the first period of the first game against the winner of the Red Wings/Dallas series.

Same hypothetical applies to the regular season.  Team A and Team B are playing a divisional game.  Team A's next game is against a different divisional opponent, Team B plays a team from the other conference.  Same end of game scenario I used before.  Suspensions aside, I feel the in game penalties should end with the final buzzer.

Answer 5

why stop at that?

take the element of human error out of the players and use robots instead

bad calls are a part of the sport, that should never change

Answer 6

Well, I agree with part of your statement.. While I don't believe calling penalties through video review is efficient.. I do believe that referees should be stripped of their ability to call goals. In my opinion _ALL_ goals should be reviewed through video (especially in the playoffs) to eliminate possible errors (obviously the goal judge can't be the same one that called the Finland vs US goal). Most goals would only take seconds to review and not slow the game down whatsoever and would eliminate terrible calls (however rare they may be) such as last night's game in Dallas.

Also, specifically for playoff games, I would like to see 'end of game penalties' carry over to the start of the next game. i.e. if a player gets a minor penalty with less than 2 minutes to go in the game, he should start the next game in the box and serve whatever remaining time he had left on the penalty (given that the other team didn't score to end the PP).

Lubers - If you're referring to the goal review, I'm all for it being enforced the entire length of the season. If you're talking about the penalty idea.. mainly because it's a series of games. Though I would not mind them enforcing that through out the season as well as long as they are able to keep track.

Lubers - Sorry, I didn't clarify this.. I meant that they would serve the remainder of the penalty against the team they played the next time they play them. So the scenario you suggested, Crosby, Malkin, and Gonchar wouldn't be in the box against Detroit in the finals because they didn't get the penalties against Detroit. Same goes for the second scenario which is why I brought up the tracking issue during the regular season. It's easy during the playoffs because the games are consecutive against the same team.

Answer 7

I thought they did review some plays.  Not sure what you are referring to on this.  It gets reviewed upstairs not by the officials down on the ice like in football, but there are plays that are reviewed.

Answer 8

do you know how long that would take

Answer 9

Game would take way too long

Answer 10

I agree with Dimas when the next game is part of the same series and the same 2 teams are playing.  What's the point of calling a delayed penalty with <30 seconds left on the clock?  It doesn't make a difference if it's not carried over for someone to serve it.