Sports & Recreation

Should the NHL implement a Coach's Challenge 'Flag' system similar to the NFL?

  • Last Updated:
  • Mar 22nd, 2013 12:04 am

Poll: Should the NHL implement a Coach's Challenge 'Flag' system similar to the NFL?

  • Total votes: 0. You have voted on this poll.
[OP]
Banned
User avatar
Apr 15, 2011
6976 posts
45 upvotes
GVRD

Should the NHL implement a Coach's Challenge 'Flag' system similar to the NFL?

Challenge flag coming to NHL?

David Shoalts
The Globe and Mail
Published Monday, Feb. 25 2013, 12:03 AM EST
Last updated Monday, Feb. 25 2013, 11:24 AM EST


http://www.theglobeandmail.com/sports/h ... rticle9017
When the NHL’s general managers gather on March 21 in Toronto for an abbreviated version of their annual meetings one thing is certain – they will recommend increased use of video replay in overturning or confirming the decisions of the on-ice officials.

The appetite for more replay use than the current standard, which sees the league’s hockey department review only goals and only whether or not the puck entered the net, is much greater than it was in November, 2010, when Florida Panthers GM Dale Tallon saw his suggestion of giving coaches one challenge a game, like the NFL, quickly rejected. Now the debate will concern just how intrusive the war room at the NHL offices in Toronto will be with the referees and just how those rulings will be applied.

“I’m more open than I was when Dale Tallon brought it up,” Detroit Red Wings GM Ken Holland said Sunday. “The big thing in our game is goals, so we have to try to make sure goals are right, that we’re not scoring goals on offsides or maybe goalie interference.”

Tallon, who made his proposal shortly after his team lost a game to the Toronto Maple Leafs when forward Colton Orr knocked down Panthers’ goaltender Scott Clemmensen and put the puck in off his skate, saw his argument boosted last week by Colorado Avalanche forward Matt Duchene. He was offside by a metre when he scored to help the Avalanche beat the Nashville Predators.

“But the question will be where you draw the line and what to include,” said Maple Leafs vice-president of hockey operations Dave Poulin. “I think it’s got its place because you always want the right call.”

The change in attitude probably came with the growing sentiment you hear behind the scenes now, that the game is too fast for the officials to call properly. This is not an indictment of the referees and the linesmen, simply the realization that the rule changes of the past eight years designed to speed up the game have done their job too well along with the players’ dedication to training and fitness.

With today’s technology, every decision by the referees and linesmen could be subject to video review. However, the main concern with the GMs is the game is already subject to enough momentum-killing television timeouts and cannot stand much more.

“The problem is, if you try to take human error out of this we’re going to slow down to a crawl,” Holland said.

The most popular solution appears to be what Tallon suggested back in 2010 – give each coach one challenge and limit it to goals. If an offside goal is scored or a penalty was missed just before a goal then it can be reversed.

“You could be over-saturating [the game] but I think in some situations, if it’s the right call or the wrong call, let’s go to it,” said Leafs head coach Randy Carlyle about more use of replay in general. “There’s no reason to have a bunch of mistakes determine success or failure.”
Personally, I like the idea. Get the call right should be foremost over any concerns over time delays.
43 replies
[OP]
Banned
User avatar
Apr 15, 2011
6976 posts
45 upvotes
GVRD
Great to see some common sense on this board! With a grand total of one vote cast in this poll (mine) at the time of this post, we have a clear consensus right now on rfd that the NHL should implement a Coach's Challenge system to allow calls to be disputed. :razz:

I get the feeling that the NHL GMs will finally come to their senses and vote to implement it.

Now, if the vote fails, then the names of the GMs who weren't in favour of it should be publicly released ... so IF a call unfairly goes against their team that would have been reversed if the system were in place, they will be in no position to whine and complain about it -- even if it costs their team the game and possibly affect their team on a larger scale, the chance of the Stanley Cup Playoffs or Heaven Forbid -- the points lost that costs them The Presidents' Trophy!!!
[OP]
Banned
User avatar
Apr 15, 2011
6976 posts
45 upvotes
GVRD
Psubs wrote: All major sports should. It's easy with the NHL as they only have 1 timeout. They should have unlimited if they keep on being correct.
I think the system the NHL should implement is that teams should get one "Coach's Challenge" per game to challenge plays where they want to dispute a call on a goal that was considered scored or not. If the Ref's decision is overturned they should get the ability to retain a "Coach's Challenge" the nex time and continue to do so as long as the original call on the ice is "reversed."

But if the Ref's original call stands, they should lose their time-out. If a time-out has already been used, the team that used the Challenge should be given a two minute delay of game penalty.

I think as the article suggested, they should definitely be allowed to use it for disputed goal calls.

Beyond that, I will have to think further on that. But I am leaning towards also having the ability to dispute calls made or (weren't made) on penalties that are of the major variety i.e. those that would cost a player more than two minutes. i.e. minor penalties can't be challenged but for five minute majors/attempt to injure to penalties, instigator penalties/10 minute or game misconducts etc. the ability for the team penalized to call for a second sober look doesn't seem like not a bad thing to have.
Deal Expert
User avatar
Jan 8, 2007
23363 posts
624 upvotes
Toronto
VCR wrote: I think the system the NHL should implement is that teams should get one "Coach's Challenge" per game to challenge plays where they want to dispute a call on a goal that was considered scored or not. If the Ref's decision is overturned they should get the ability to retain a "Coach's Challenge" the nex time and continue to do so as long as the original call on the ice is "reversed."

But if the Ref's original call stands, they should lose their time-out. If a time-out has already been used, the team that used the Challenge should be given a two minute delay of game penalty.

I think as the article suggested, they should definitely be allowed to use it for disputed goal calls.

Beyond that, I will have to think further on that. But I am leaning towards also having the ability to dispute calls made or (weren't made) on penalties that are of the major variety i.e. those that would cost a player more than two minutes. i.e. minor penalties can't be challenged but for five minute majors/attempt to injure to penalties, instigator penalties/10 minute or game misconducts etc. the ability for the team penalized to call for a second sober look doesn't seem like not a bad thing to have.
Oh, I like the delay of game option after timeout has been used. Maybe it should be a 3 minute powerplay as it seems like much more of a delay than a 2 minute minor but not as bad as a double minor. lol
[OP]
Banned
User avatar
Apr 15, 2011
6976 posts
45 upvotes
GVRD
Psubs wrote: Oh, I like the delay of game option after timeout has been used. Maybe it should be a 3 minute powerplay as it seems like much more of a delay than a 2 minute minor but not as bad as a double minor. lol
I think two minutes minor for delay of game would be a sufficient penalty to give to avoid time wasting challenges. Anyway, I think the missed call on this play has caused renewed interest for the Coach's Challenge type system to be implemented in the NHL:




[IMG]http://i49.tinypic.com/a5ide.jpg[/IMG]

What if the Predators' miss the playoffs or have their playoffs position decreased due to that call that potentially cost them two points?


It would be nice if they institute for this season's Playoffs rather than delay it until next season.
"I don't think conflict is a bad thing ... As long as you handle it as men." - John Tortorella

2013 RFD NHL Playoffs Pool CHAMPION #CONFIRMED
Deal Addict
Oct 17, 2005
4049 posts
2718 upvotes
Toronto
They should do this for every sport(up to a limit). Why not?
[OP]
Banned
User avatar
Apr 15, 2011
6976 posts
45 upvotes
GVRD
Spiderpal93 wrote: They should do this for every sport(up to a limit). Why not?
Psubs wrote: If Baseball does it then every sport should since they are the most finicky about their umpires the their game.
Actually, only in American Football, the NFL and CFL for that matter has a specific "Coach's Challenge."

In the NBA, NHL and MLB only in specific circumstances can instant replay be used to review a call.

Soccer is finally getting into the 21st century, as goal line technology will be implemented in the EPL next season and also be used in the upcoming World Cup.
"I don't think conflict is a bad thing ... As long as you handle it as men." - John Tortorella

2013 RFD NHL Playoffs Pool CHAMPION #CONFIRMED
Deal Addict
Jan 12, 2012
3147 posts
170 upvotes
East York
I like the coaches challenge on goals but I think they should only get one or 2 a game MAX and there should be a consequence if you use it and you're wrong..

In the NFL is the coach uses a flag and the call stands the team loses a time out..

In the NHL taking away a time out wouldn't be a punishment because there hardly used...What would you use as the punishment? Automatic 2 minute penalty?
[OP]
Banned
User avatar
Apr 15, 2011
6976 posts
45 upvotes
GVRD
Drew87 wrote: I like the coaches challenge on goals but I think they should only get one or 2 a game MAX and there should be a consequence if you use it and you're wrong..

In the NFL is the coach uses a flag and the call stands the team loses a time out..

In the NHL taking away a time out wouldn't be a punishment because there hardly used...What would you use as the punishment? Automatic 2 minute penalty?
This:
VCR wrote: I think the system the NHL should implement is that teams should get one "Coach's Challenge" per game to challenge plays where they want to dispute a call on a goal that was considered scored or not. If the Ref's decision is overturned they should get the ability to retain a "Coach's Challenge" the nex time and continue to do so as long as the original call on the ice is "reversed."

But if the Ref's original call stands, they should lose their time-out. If a time-out has already been used, the team that used the Challenge should be given a two minute delay of game penalty.

I think as the article suggested, they should definitely be allowed to use it for disputed goal calls.

Beyond that, I will have to think further on that. But I am leaning towards also having the ability to dispute calls made or (weren't made) on penalties that are of the major variety i.e. those that would cost a player more than two minutes. i.e. minor penalties can't be challenged but for five minute majors/attempt to injure to penalties, instigator penalties/10 minute or game misconducts etc. the ability for the team penalized to call for a second sober look doesn't seem like not a bad thing to have.
"I don't think conflict is a bad thing ... As long as you handle it as men." - John Tortorella

2013 RFD NHL Playoffs Pool CHAMPION #CONFIRMED
Deal Expert
May 17, 2008
15134 posts
158 upvotes
I think this would be dumb. I like the limited way it is used right now, and would probably support adding goaltender interference to what they are allowed to review, since that can be a really tough call to make on the ice and it keeps the scope of the review very compact.

The Duchene goal looks like something that would be super easy to call back, but the wording of a rule like that would likely leave it open to a lot of uses that are much less clear cut. Nobody likes getting screwed, but mistakes are part of the game, and I think they are preferable to spending more and more time waiting for video reviews that don't really work in a game like hockey.
[OP]
Banned
User avatar
Apr 15, 2011
6976 posts
45 upvotes
GVRD
BornRuff wrote: I think this would be dumb. I like the limited way it is used right now, and would probably support adding goaltender interference to what they are allowed to review, since that can be a really tough call to make on the ice and it keeps the scope of the review very compact.

The Duchene goal looks like something that would be super easy to call back, but the wording of a rule like that would likely leave it open to a lot of uses that are much less clear cut. Nobody likes getting screwed, but mistakes are part of the game, and I think they are preferable to spending more and more time waiting for video reviews that don't really work in a game like hockey.
Unlike football, I don't see a constant amount of challenges used in a per game basis in the NHL especially they limit it to goal calls like when a player is called for "goalie interference" and the goal is taken away. It would still be limited use comparatively speaking to the NFL which its use has helped improve the game.

IMO, people who think this is "dumb" are probably watching their games on and tube tv and recording their games on VCRs (myself excluded) :cool: ...

Stop living in the past, brothas and sistas ..... it's the 21st century if you haven't noticed. :razz:
"I don't think conflict is a bad thing ... As long as you handle it as men." - John Tortorella

2013 RFD NHL Playoffs Pool CHAMPION #CONFIRMED
Deal Expert
May 17, 2008
15134 posts
158 upvotes
VCR wrote: Unlike football, I don't see a constant amount of challenges used in a per game basis in the NHL especially they limit it to goal calls like when a player is called for "goalie interference" and the goal is taken away. It would still be limited use comparatively speaking to the NFL which its use has helped improve the game.

IMO, people who think this is "dumb" are probably watching their games on and tube tv and recording their games on VCRs (myself excluded) :cool: ...

Stop living in the past, brothas and sistas ..... it's the 21st century if you haven't noticed. :razz:
How would you word a rule about calling back goals for an offside?

If a team goes offside and the play continues in the zone for a minute and then they score, would that get called back? Would you re add a minute to the clock?

Top

Thread Information

There is currently 1 user viewing this thread. (0 members and 1 guest)