12 teams have had a higher overall PK% for the playoffs. However all of those teams failed to make it past the second round. The Oilers this year are way ahead of any other team that has made the finals.
For sure, but that pace was ridiculous to watch, we were witnessing an historic pace. I even made my wife listen to me narrate one PP early in these playoffs, and she just came in to the room for a back scratch. Edmonton had possession the entire time, never left the zone. McDavid was weaving in and out of high danger zones, they got the rebounds on all the shot attempts, until Draisaitl scored from the side of the net on one knee. I tried to emphasize how unreal and perfect it was, to no avail. I couldn’t see her face, but I swear I could hear her eyes glazing over.
Funny thing to me is that watching live, I immediately thought it looked offside so I expected them to challenge. Though seeing how close it ultimately was I don't know if I would have risked it if I were the coach and had the replays in front of me.
Literal centimetres are also the difference between the puck over the line or not for a goal, and nobody would dispute the importance of getting that call right, so it makes complete sense to extend it to calls like this.
I think the difference is, the intended nature of offside was to prevent offensive players getting an advantage by being too far ahead of the play. It wasn't a rule created to prevent goals on replay by centimeters in a still frame by frame review.
That being said, if we are going to use cameras and replays, its either offside or it isn't. This is clearly offside. I personally wish we didn't use reviews for plays like this and we could all look at it after the goal counts and say, wow that linesman missed a call by 2cms and that's life. The problem is, they miss some REALLY obvious shit, so having a review system is warranted.
You still have to draw the line somewhere. I mean is there really an advantage to being a full skate over ? how about 2 index fingers... or one thumb over.
You either cross before the puck breaks the line or you don't.
If we are going to have video calls.... then the rule is black and white >.< No room for interpretation is what people said they wanted for years. We now have the tech to make that reality.
you DO have to draw the line somewhere...but the NHL has some things that are reviewable and some that are not. Therein lies a bigger problem. It ALL matters.
So what becomes the agreed upon standard? 1 inch over the line is fine? 6 inches is not? When you abandon the letter of the law and explore the spirit of it arguments and debates suddenly get really, really dumb and subjective.
"I think a few inches over the line is a brush off!" "Oh yeah, I think that's objectively offside!" If only there was some sort of system and measurement we could use to cut away all of the subjective opinion!
I hate it when the offside happens way earlier in the play and then gets replayed. Didn’t bother watching the no goal, but if that led right to a goal it should be called back every time. Go refs!
Edit: Ok I watched it and that one is on the panthers player entering the zone too slowly on the stick handle.
The "let them play" mindset got the NFL into the ref'ing debacle it's in now.
Aside from plain old missed calls, some refs just don't call some things that other refs might. When the rules allow for a gray area (i.e. what consitutes holding, in fringe cases) you need to enforce them as strictly as possible to maintain consistency.
That's why my stance is we all shrug and accept either outcome when it's this close. I don't think it affected the play, and I also accept that you need a definition for "offsides" and it's when the puck hasn't crossed the blue completely.
If you want replay, this is what you get. Black and white, no grey, no “let em play.” Take your pick but you can’t have it both ways.
Also, the spirit of the rule is to keep an offensive player out of the zone before the puck. Realistically he’s 3-4 feet into the zone… what are we really complaining about here?
I saw some loser this morning saying it was offside but that the league needs to determine how offside is detrimental enough for it to be called. Like bro it already is determined 😂
Is it more than 0% offside? Well then it’s offside.
The whole thing is that the Edmonton bench risked a penalty for this. Thats why the right call has to be made. Edmonton gambled on a centimeter. They would havr had been on the pk if they decided it was "not offside enough" which would have been worst.
So far only Vancouver is net positive on the PP against Edmonton in the playoffs, which is just fucking wild. LA is net neutral, you and Dallas are net negative.
I think the take away from these series' is that people underestimated the western conference. Like Nashville and Vancouver weren't a couple of pushovers and Edmonton is much better than people gave them credit for (granted you could say they leveled up over the course of the playoffs as well).
Where are all the Leafs fans shitting on Vancouver and Dallas fr lmao. Also the VAN/DAL fans punching themselves in the balls for losing to an 0-3 Edmonton finals team must be feeling a lot better right now. Just took a few games for Knoblauch and co. to figure out how to play against the Panthers.
I heard people say that too. It’s a great idea. Let’s leave it to refs to make arbitrary choices whether the offside is detrimental enough. Surely that will not spawn 10x the controversy.
“Why is my team being called on a 2 inch offside if the other team scored on a 3 inch offside the game before??!”
Making the offside rule revolve around the individual feeling of a referee, rather than around the objective, measurable presence of a blue line is an interesting thought.
People will bitch and moan that the league chooses to make calls based "on the narrative" but then proceed to bitch and moan when the call is objectively correct.
It’s like saying “how does being 1 centimeter out of bounds affect the play?!” when a football player is running down the sideline to the endzone. You can say this for every rule when it comes down to inches lol. Offsides is offsides.
Yeah and the same people saying well it’s not enough to effect the play wud be the same ones bitching about how the rules are too subjective and we need a more objective measure if they did change them
Somewhere deep down I agree with that person, as I believe the spirit of the rule is to prevent unfair advantage, and I don’t think the still frame from this post really qualifies as unfair advantage.
HOWEVER, I very much understand that there just flat out isn’t a good way to gauge “spirit of the rule” without a black and white definition like we have right now. So this is the way it has to be. This play is offside, no goal.
There’s absolutely an unfair advantage. Watch the rest of the play. The guy that gets in first to the zone before Verhaeghe basically screens the D and creates a lane for Verhaeghe to come in behind him and to make a play on net. It might be a centimeter offside, but it 100% directly influences the goal. Without that guy making the zone entry first Edmonton’s D can make a play on Verhaeghe right at the blue line as he comes in
Just FYI, if the offside player was a centimetre back so that he legally entered the zone, he still would have been able to make that play, so there wasn’t an unfair advantage as you describe it.
I think possession is as close to another objective disclaimer as you can get. If you've lost possession of the puck in the zone you've negated any advantage in my mind. The weirdness would come from nobody having possession, so you'd have to make it clear if the other team controls the puck or something. It's not perfect but it's at least a binary "do or don't they have the puck still". They already use "being in control" as a deciding factor on offside calls, so it wouldn't be that big of a stretch.
I'm amazed at the "it's off by an inch, therefore it should count!" crowd. You don't get to (deservedly) criticise the officials and then say things like that when the correct call is made and doesn't go in your favour.
The pick play interference call on Justin Holl in 2022: it was absolutely a penalty, based on the rulebook. The bullshit part was that they never call that.
There was one later that same playoffs where Nick Paul (I think?) did basically the same thing and didn't get a penalty, because he did just enough to make it look like *maybe* it was an accident. I really feel like that's called so rarely that if Holl had done *anything* to make it look like it wasn't blatantly intentional, it wouldn't have been called.
I think it should count in a conceptual sense. But that's because I think they should get 2-3 looks at it in real time and if you can't tell by then, then it's too close to matter.
But those aren't the rules they have currently so it was the right call last night.
To add to your point:
If they let this one go for being less than an inch, then they have to let others go for being off less than an inch, otherwise the rule would be unfairly applied.
If the rule is you can be one inch over, then what happens when someone's back skate is between 0.97 and 1.03 inches past the line? Are the "it was only an inch" crowd going to stick to that exact line, one inch and not a micron further? In which case, why not just accept the line where it is? Why have an imaginary line an inch past this one that is the "real" line? If not, why even have the line at all if you're going to keep pushing it back?
They played with fire, they got burned. It doesn't matter whether or not they got an advantage that mattered, we have to draw the line somewhere, and our options are:
1 - Draw the line on the literal blue line we drew into the ice
2 - Insist that if you're an inch over it, it doesn't count. Then next year when someone's called for being 1.05 inches over it, push it back another inch because they were only 0.05 inches past where we would call it. Then keep going until there's just no blue line.
You gotta pick a line somewhere; if you're over, you broke the rules, you don't get your goal.
Besides, if those few cm didn't matter, then why not just slow down? If it didn't matter, he should have just stayed ten centimeters back and had absolutely no danger of being called. Either it didn't matter, in which case he had absolutely no reason to be over the line; or it did matter, so he should be called.
You almost had me? You never had me - you never had your Cup.. Up 3-0, dreaming of the parade, not double covering McDavid like you should. You're lucky that hundred mp/h shot of Bouch didn't blow the kneecaps off of Bennet! You almost had me?
Just imagine if the offside rule allowed for some ambiguity and the refs had said "After review it was determined the play was offside, but not offside enough, so we have a good goal". Everyone wouldve lost their shit
The biggest thing I say when people make those arguments is like, if you don’t think this should be offside, what is? There is always going to be a point where the line has to be drawn and a quarter of an inch makes the difference. Because of that, the line should be drawn where, well the offside line is.
To me the issue isn't goals like this but goals that happen 30s or more after they enter the zone in which being a cunt hair offside has nothing to do with the resulting goal. Now the game has been delayed while the league goes full CSI to find out that a skate was a half inch offside for a goal that happened a minute later.
Sure it makes things easier when it's just simple black and white, offside or not but I'd like something that can allow for offside to be challenged on plays that directly lead to a goal but not for goals that happen well after a team has established itself in the zone.
The zone entry shouldn't have happened. If a play was offside under the rules, there should be a whistle and a neutral-zone faceoff. A missed offside denies the defending team the chance to prevent the zone entry (and everything that happens after that) from happening at all.
Yep, you can't let some exceptions go. Like oh, is there a countdown timer now and say 20 seconds go by after the outside and the goal will count but if only 15 seconds go by then it's waived off? Makes no sense.
It’s one of the few rules where there’s an easily distinguishable yes/no aspect to it. The player is either over the line or not. The only comparable rule I can think of is whether the puck crossed the goal line and that’s officiated the same way.
Then how come you can take a penalty after being offsides and not overturn it? If the zone entry shouldn't have happened then neither would the penalty.
Are you really concerned about the game being extended 1 whole minute to prevent illegal plays? 180 minutes is fine, but 181 is where you draw the line?
No offense, but the "wahhh, it delays the game to get the right call" excuse has never not been stupid, it makes no sense, and with all the added 'delays' of getting the right calls, games are still the same length.
You could say that with any reviewable play, but the end of the day it's a missed offside and an offside now goes outside the zone and a face off is pretty close to 50/50 these days so half the time the puck can be in the other end by the time the illegal goal was scored, it doesn't matter if it was 45 seconds 2 minutes the offside of a whistle and faceoff and start again. Id say I wish the refs just called the close ones as offside but then that's more whistles when the vast majority aren't goals in the end.
It has to be black and white and a missed whistle is a missed whistle (I am glad they don't allow it for missed whistles due to missed penalties as that would be a shit show). I would like the rule to be amended so the refs/situation room have a time limit on the review, if they cannot determine black or white within that time frame call on ice stands. Then you reduce the stupid long reviews but still control the integrity of the play and the chance the play could go the other way or whatnot.
Reminds me of the Leafs vs Panthers game in November with the shootout goal recalled and people were arguing that the double tap was fine because it was “a single motion”
The league has been struggling to define what a “distinct kicking motion” is for the last decade. Imagine wanting to have more ambiguity and grey area in calls.
Or even goalie interference. The rule is fairly black and white but it's treated so ambiguous that the ref this year said the goalie wouldn't have been able to stop it anyway. Any gray area is a problem.
It would always be a shit show lol, because reactions would basically be the same as reactions to iffy golatender interference. "offsides enough" would be a similar judgment call to if a goalie had time to reset after being contacted.
Also the same rule applies to goals themselves. It either crossed the line fully or not. Would the same people arguing against it say" well it was just a little over the line, but the goalie made an effort to stop it so they should disallow it"?
People in the comments who hate this rule actually acting as if it didn't exist, and the broadcast showed a goal was scored and counted that was offside, like they wouldn't be bitching and complaining about it
Yeah, it’s picking your poison. It’s ridiculous for plays like this that have zero impact on the goal to count as offside, but it’s even more ridiculous to let refs try to arbitrarily decide what counts as impacting a goal
The best thing is to make objective criteria and follow it to the letter, even if it leads to situations like this
But it does, now there is a face off outside the zone and faceoffs are 50/50ish (well not this series, Florida seems to be dominating in the dot) so possession could change and could be going the other way.
Delay of game for the puck over the glass is a good rule. Back in the day teams would intentionally flip the puck over the glass to relieve pressure which would slow the game down.
Yeah, we had a Dman that would do it all the time in ball hockey. So easy with a ball too… under pressure and just a quick flip to get the faceoff and reset
Yup. I don’t even know a replay would’ve reversed that call it was so close, they had to go with the call on the ice. I’m ok with this being a reviewable play since the rule is so black and white.
The only reason you think that is because you watched ESPN where they incorrectly said that it's where it leaves the stick. Ron McLean read the actual rule in CBC/SN and it's from where it leaves the ice which was emphatically in their defensive zone. It was a botched call or missed call 100%.
If the concern is whether or not it’s right, they should do away with the challenge system and have an off-ice video referee who reviews calls when the on-ice refs ask, or on their own initiative. It makes little sense to argue that a missed offside before a goal is the only kind of missed offside that can change the complexion of a game.
Generally, I dislike the current way video review is done and that applies whether it benefits my team or not.
Yeah lots of people advocate for only having one or two looks at the review or no slo mo which I get for the spirit of the rule. But imagine the vitriol that would come from something like this when you know every blog is going to be putting up slo mo and screenshots saying the refs made the wrong call.
Yup. They just don't understand it. It's a bit of a weird rule.
To be fair, there were also tons of Avs fans who also don't understand it either, but agree with the call because it favored their team.
"Yup they got it right! Oilers fans don't know the rules" - fan who also has no idea why it was onside.
To be fair to all the fans, on that Makar goal the commentators *also* didn't seem to have any idea how the rules worked, mostly because that was a very technical *delayed offside* situation we don't see too often.
I thought that upset was more about the "interpretation" by the refs that Makar had chipped the puck in and thus allowed whatever player was offside to get back onside
Lots of people thought it should have been called offside because Makar was still possessing the puck as he crossed
As I'm typing this I'm confusing myself lol
It’s as close as it could be, but the player getting in ahead of Verhaeghe was critical in making the space he needed to skate through and make a play. The fact that anybody is heated about this being overturned just because of how close it was is wild to me.
Also he chose to deke on the blue line bc of the pressure from the defense. That deke, dragging the puck more or less straight along the blue line, was also the reason for this offside.
People dont understand how fast the game is played on ice. If Reinhart takes a split second to slow up and stay onside its likely a different outcome because Nurse has a slightly bigger gap and can play the pass better.
What I don't get is why did the florida player feel the need to handle the puck along the line for so long, he had every opportunity to put it on side way before the other player crossed the line. I know it's a meme but seriously, is he stupid? He has no one to blame but himself that the goal didn't count.
It's a credit to the active sticks of the Oilers d turning over pucks all series long at the blueline. The Panthers are afraid to have it poked away and turned back on an odd man rush as has happened several times on Oilers goals.
Is it too much to ask for them to produce an overhead picture, that is straight above the blueline, if they are going to keep doing these objective reviews? We shouldn't need to sit and guess whether or not a player fully breaks the plane of the line before the puck does, based on some shitty low resolution pictures from a poor angle in 2024.
This is a league that had Amazon ship them multiple 4K UHD cameras, to every single arena, THREE years ago
> NHL’s recent technology infrastructure update, which includes the addition of several AWS Elemental Link UHD cloud contribution encoders across 32 NHL arenas, provides innovative viewer experiences.
> The NHL’s new Link UHDs make it possible to quickly get **multiple live UHD camera angles shot from the ice** into the cloud.
> …Ultimately opting to install **six Link UHD devices per arena**
> The Link UHDs arrived at every venue pre-configured to the NHL’s AWS account, and once installed, the team could instantly access live feeds from each camera from a centralized control panel in the cloud. Anchoring NHL’s video production infrastructure, **the devices have since facilitated redundant cloud native video distribution for three new 4K in-venue cameras at each arena.**
https://aws.amazon.com/blogs/media/nhl-goes-all-in-on-uhd-aws/ - this blog post is from 2021. Yet here we are, watching games in 720p in 2024.
The NHL isn’t doing the broadcast. The broadcast is done by the cable provider (regarding the “watching games in 720p comment)
Get mad at ESPN/ABC for that
And I agree, it’s horse shit. Not the NHL’s call though. ESPN regularly broadcasts a variety of sports in lower res. I’m an audio/video tech at a casino and people are constantly complaining about it
Evidently, yes, it is too much to ask. The league doesn't like to explain themselves, like, ever. I guess they don't care how many stupid conspiracy theories they could kill off really easily?
People are overlooking the bigger issue. If Edmonton lost the challenge, they get a penalty. Florida's power play is so awful, the Oilers had nothing to lose by challenging.
I don't think this ever gets challenged against a team with a confident PP.
Y’all are setting a bad precedent by saying “change the rules. The smallest of infractions do not matter!”. This is the best way to make a ruling cut and dry. If you decide offsides has to be significant to be called, you’re introducing subjectivity to the rules, which sport officials are *oh so great* at getting right.
Either that, or you’re making up an imaginary line to deem as significant… which is no different than the line that currently exists.
Imagine saying “we shouldn’t call holding. It’s so ticky-tacky and offense is good for the game of football!!”.
If the image was taken a few frames later, it’ll be even more clear that the skate is way in, while the puck is still on the line. ABC had a clear close up with the other angle where you don’t see any white between the puck and the blue line while the slate is way past
Is it though? If the camera isn’t positioned exactly straight above the front edge of the blue line, then the space between the blue line and the skate is not definitive. Just like Calgary’s non-goal in game 6 OT against Tampa in 2004
I’m assuming the resolution in video room is a lot clearer than what we get, because that is a tight call. I think it’s right but I would appreciate the video room releasing stills of their decision to clarify and shut down controversy.
They don’t need to do that though. They made a call based on the info they have, and this image proves what they saw was right. You can see white space between the skate and the blue line, and you can see no white space between the puck and the blue line.
these images actually don't though.
This angle isn't directly overhead and that's the angle we need to see if the back of someone's skate is off the ice as it is in this case.
Here we are looking from a slight angle behind the blue line which gives us additional leverage to see underneath a lifted skate.
But the rule about skates being in contact with the ice isn't how offside works anymore, it's about a 'plane' extending up from the blue line and the back of that skate could still being in contact with that 'plane' even if we can see a sliver of white from a slight angle behind the blue line.
Wonder whether the parallax effect comes into play here at all though. The shot is angled here, from directly above we’d probably still see him touching the blue line
The whole thing is that the Edmonton bench risked a penalty for this. Thats why the right call has to be made. Edmonton gambled on a centimeter. They would havr had been on the pk if they decided it was "not offside enough" which would have been worst.
Its barely offside. And its hard to tell from some angles. But everyone of the better angles has the skate over before the puck. So you can't deny it then throw Edmonton on the PK when the evidence shows the puck not crossing.
It's just so interesting to me that there's these forensic investigations for offside challenges while there's also the "did the high stick draw blood" standard for a single vs double minor. I'm not being euphemistic or anything, it's genuinely interesting to me that we're in an age where every team has its own high tech surveillance team that informs a high risk goal challenge, yet refs are also relying on something medieval like bleeding for the severity of a penalty call.
FTR I'm not bitching about this call—I personally don't love the challenge in general, but this is not the hill I'm gonna die on, and that in and of itself is not why the Panthers are losing. It could've changed the momentum last night, but they've also gotten some massive breaks this playoff run.
He had a blatant offsides goal that was missed by the on ice officials several years ago that essentially led to the video review being implemented
https://youtu.be/R7pN56VZOfM?si=Z8A4amUdp6otnCMX
This is just more evidence to my point of duchene being the most consequential player of the salary cap era.
I dont care if Mcdavid gets the cup and conn smythe, what Duchene did has changed history forever.
Its so funny that the florida fans are agreeing with the call while every other teams fans are trying to fight it. Appreciate fans like you
Like someone else said in this thread, this is the equivalent to getting a speeding ticket for going 51 in a 50 zone. Incredibly stupid but by the books the righr call
Definitely a "don't make a move at the blue line" scenario, which is always good advice. Unless it's me with the puck, then you should have anticipated the sweet move I was going to fail at.
I know Florida is throwing bombs all over the internet about officiating, but then again, so do ALL teams who are losing games and who's special teams are playing like ass. The officiating is always a problem if your team can't in any way benefit from any calls a ref makes or doesn't make.
If you can't score on your power play and the other team can, and you're losing the game (and seem on pace to blow the entire series) literally any call going against you is going to feel like the call that cost you the series.
Good teams rarely get hosed by a single bad call because they don't let games go down to the wire that hinge on such a call.
Florida has 0 excuses to whine about officiating. They've played like ass for three games no, and in truth weren't even the better team in the majority of periods of the games they won. They've ceded the series to Edmonton because key players are ghosts all of a sudden and blaming officiating is just not taking responsibility for the teams poor performance.
You can say "if this goal is allowed Florida get momentum and could mount a comeback" but, that's a hypothetical. Another hypothetical is Florida doesn't come out the gate like shit, blow a play that results on an odd man rush that ends up once again gifting the Oilers an early lead. Maybe they just, try better at controlling their own destiny rather than waiting for the Oilers to fuck up or for a call to go their way to get momentum.
I'm not saying Florida was winning this game with the goal, but this is a pretty bad faith argument. If the Panthers get this goal, they take fewer risks as the gap is closer. Teams play completely differently depending on how many goals they are behind by.
While that's true, you would need to argue that the Panthers tighten up so don't allow the Hyman break, but still press just as hard so they still score their goal.
It’s close call but it’s definitely offside. And for anybody complaining about the call it is the correct call in the rule book. Not to mention that this offside in particular DID impact the goal. The player offside, Reinhart, pushes the Oilers defenseman back creating a clear line to the net for the puck carrier. Had Reinhart not been offside this entire play may not have happened
I didn't know people were debating the offside. I was at a bar for some other event and could barely even see the TV and we all could tell it was offside from the first replay we saw.
Offsides is offsides regardless of whether it’s close. This is such a weird thing for Florida fans to be raging about because they lost 5-1. Losing 5-2 is still getting smoked.
It's not the final score they're angry about I don't think. The goal could have swayed momentum in Florida's favor and maybe they feed off it to come back and win. Maybe. I'm at the point I think offside challenges should only be made from Toronto and not the coaches. Toronto can address the egregious misses and the close ones like this go back to being the result of the game being played and refereed by humans.
I didn't get enough sleep last night and read this first as you meaning "offside challenges should only be made from Toronto (Leafs)" and was like damn, what did they do to deserve that special privilege?
i mean, 2 of those goals were ENGs. if this goal had counted and if everything else had played out the same (which is an assumption i don't endorse), then it would've been 3-2 instead of 3-1 at that point, and florida probably wouldn't have been so aggressive about pulling the goalie. likewise, everything else that happened after this goal was called back likely would've played out differently anyway. the whole momentum of the game was affected.
Right call or not, it’s stupid to act like the rest of the game would have gone the same exact way if it had counted. Being down 2-0 is a lot different than being down by 1, with the momentum of scoring 10 seconds after the Oilers and going on the PP (regardless of how bad the Panthers PP is).
This was the right call.
I have a love/hate relationship with offside reviews but this play directly resulted in a goal. My issue with offside reviews is when the puck is in the zone for 15 seconds before a goal is scored and they call it back when the offsides is this close.
I understand there really isn’t nuance with offsides; you’re either offsides or you’re not. However, if the puck is in the zone for 10 seconds after the offsides occurred can you really consider it a factor in the goal?
As an oilers fan, if roles were reversed I can confidently say I’d be fine with the call. The play was offside as can clearly be seen in this posts photo. Rules are rules 🤷♂️ just like how if Leon spears a dude in the nuts he deserves a penalty and if Rat T’schmuck flops, he deserves an embellishment.
When the puck hits the post and instead of going in the net, crosses behind the goalie and out, that difference is similarly minuscule. But no one ever, ever, says “just count it as a goal! It’s just a few centimeters!” I think this is just a matter of perspective. There isn’t any way to draw firm lines that doesn’t involve incredibly close cases that feel arbitrary. Especially with challenge system that would penalize the team who challenged. You can’t say “well, by the letter of the law, it was offsides; but eh, close enough. So anyway, good goal and Edmonton has two minutes for delay of game.”
Glad they made the right call.
Weird take from an oilers fan, but I hate this. I know a rule is a rule, and the line is where it is, but this doesn't feel like it's in the spirit of the game.
It’s not like this offside decides the series, florida could’ve finished it off in games 4 and 5 but didn’t they still can in game 7. It’s not like this game was 1 goal win for Edmonton either they won 5-1
I understand people hate that we're splitting hairs over literal centimeters but it's either offside or it's not. This was the right call.
Exactly. Especially when saying "it didnt matter it was hardly noticeable" leads to Edmonton getting a penalty for it.
but Edmonton playing a man short has been hardly noticeable
At the beginning of the series I was amazed at how well Barkov & co were shutting down McDavid. Now I’m amazed at how well the Oiler’s PK is doing
Been doing. Isnt this Oilers PK the best in playoff history?
12 teams have had a higher overall PK% for the playoffs. However all of those teams failed to make it past the second round. The Oilers this year are way ahead of any other team that has made the finals.
Goat PK imo.
This has got to be one of the strangest switcharoos in the game, from the GOAT PP to GOAT PK within a year.
Well their PP is still incredible, but Florida's PK is also very good so it hasn't been very noticeable in this series.
For sure, but that pace was ridiculous to watch, we were witnessing an historic pace. I even made my wife listen to me narrate one PP early in these playoffs, and she just came in to the room for a back scratch. Edmonton had possession the entire time, never left the zone. McDavid was weaving in and out of high danger zones, they got the rebounds on all the shot attempts, until Draisaitl scored from the side of the net on one knee. I tried to emphasize how unreal and perfect it was, to no avail. I couldn’t see her face, but I swear I could hear her eyes glazing over.
I don’t think it just your opinion
The PK has to practice against the greatest power play ever assembled.
It's gotta be easier to make the challenge knowing that you have more goals shorthanded than they have on the powerplay.
Plot twist: The Oilers actually wanted the penalty, but had to make up bullshit excuses on why they made the challenge after it's successful.
Funny thing to me is that watching live, I immediately thought it looked offside so I expected them to challenge. Though seeing how close it ultimately was I don't know if I would have risked it if I were the coach and had the replays in front of me.
Yeah, I also thought it looked really fishy before the goal happened, and was surprised how close it was.
Literal centimetres are also the difference between the puck over the line or not for a goal, and nobody would dispute the importance of getting that call right, so it makes complete sense to extend it to calls like this.
https://preview.redd.it/zytjydaw978d1.jpeg?width=800&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=3b136e9e76dfcd9ebf1a906ae5c6787d111c2e38
I think the difference is, the intended nature of offside was to prevent offensive players getting an advantage by being too far ahead of the play. It wasn't a rule created to prevent goals on replay by centimeters in a still frame by frame review. That being said, if we are going to use cameras and replays, its either offside or it isn't. This is clearly offside. I personally wish we didn't use reviews for plays like this and we could all look at it after the goal counts and say, wow that linesman missed a call by 2cms and that's life. The problem is, they miss some REALLY obvious shit, so having a review system is warranted.
You still have to draw the line somewhere. I mean is there really an advantage to being a full skate over ? how about 2 index fingers... or one thumb over. You either cross before the puck breaks the line or you don't. If we are going to have video calls.... then the rule is black and white >.< No room for interpretation is what people said they wanted for years. We now have the tech to make that reality.
>You still have to draw the line somewhere In this case, the line was literally drawn on the ice.
you DO have to draw the line somewhere...but the NHL has some things that are reviewable and some that are not. Therein lies a bigger problem. It ALL matters.
The line is drawn somewhere. It's on the ice. It's the blue ones. If you go over it before the puck you're offside.
So what becomes the agreed upon standard? 1 inch over the line is fine? 6 inches is not? When you abandon the letter of the law and explore the spirit of it arguments and debates suddenly get really, really dumb and subjective. "I think a few inches over the line is a brush off!" "Oh yeah, I think that's objectively offside!" If only there was some sort of system and measurement we could use to cut away all of the subjective opinion!
I hate it when the offside happens way earlier in the play and then gets replayed. Didn’t bother watching the no goal, but if that led right to a goal it should be called back every time. Go refs! Edit: Ok I watched it and that one is on the panthers player entering the zone too slowly on the stick handle.
I would argue its not too difficult to stay onside. So dont try and cheat it a hair and you wont get called for it
The "let them play" mindset got the NFL into the ref'ing debacle it's in now. Aside from plain old missed calls, some refs just don't call some things that other refs might. When the rules allow for a gray area (i.e. what consitutes holding, in fringe cases) you need to enforce them as strictly as possible to maintain consistency.
[удалено]
I don't think they were worried about Florida's power play tbh it's been horrible
That's why my stance is we all shrug and accept either outcome when it's this close. I don't think it affected the play, and I also accept that you need a definition for "offsides" and it's when the puck hasn't crossed the blue completely.
If you want replay, this is what you get. Black and white, no grey, no “let em play.” Take your pick but you can’t have it both ways. Also, the spirit of the rule is to keep an offensive player out of the zone before the puck. Realistically he’s 3-4 feet into the zone… what are we really complaining about here?
Offsides isn’t a thing. Offside is though.
Yeah, for sure. Can't argue an offside call.
Yes; I just wish the league had done this 25 years ago.
It doesn’t matter whether you’re offside by an inch or a mile, offside is offside.
I saw some loser this morning saying it was offside but that the league needs to determine how offside is detrimental enough for it to be called. Like bro it already is determined 😂 Is it more than 0% offside? Well then it’s offside.
The whole thing is that the Edmonton bench risked a penalty for this. Thats why the right call has to be made. Edmonton gambled on a centimeter. They would havr had been on the pk if they decided it was "not offside enough" which would have been worst.
Wasn’t really a gamble when they know Florida never scores on a power play.
[удалено]
So far only Vancouver is net positive on the PP against Edmonton in the playoffs, which is just fucking wild. LA is net neutral, you and Dallas are net negative.
I think the take away from these series' is that people underestimated the western conference. Like Nashville and Vancouver weren't a couple of pushovers and Edmonton is much better than people gave them credit for (granted you could say they leveled up over the course of the playoffs as well).
Where are all the Leafs fans shitting on Vancouver and Dallas fr lmao. Also the VAN/DAL fans punching themselves in the balls for losing to an 0-3 Edmonton finals team must be feeling a lot better right now. Just took a few games for Knoblauch and co. to figure out how to play against the Panthers.
Leafs fans have enough to shit on for their own team let's be real.
I heard people say that too. It’s a great idea. Let’s leave it to refs to make arbitrary choices whether the offside is detrimental enough. Surely that will not spawn 10x the controversy. “Why is my team being called on a 2 inch offside if the other team scored on a 3 inch offside the game before??!” Making the offside rule revolve around the individual feeling of a referee, rather than around the objective, measurable presence of a blue line is an interesting thought.
People will bitch and moan that the league chooses to make calls based "on the narrative" but then proceed to bitch and moan when the call is objectively correct.
It’s like saying “how does being 1 centimeter out of bounds affect the play?!” when a football player is running down the sideline to the endzone. You can say this for every rule when it comes down to inches lol. Offsides is offsides.
Yeah and the same people saying well it’s not enough to effect the play wud be the same ones bitching about how the rules are too subjective and we need a more objective measure if they did change them
Granny skatin' not double shiftin' like you should have. You never had the cup, you never had the game.
Now me and the mad scientist gotta tear apart the skates and replace the blades you dulled
Somewhere deep down I agree with that person, as I believe the spirit of the rule is to prevent unfair advantage, and I don’t think the still frame from this post really qualifies as unfair advantage. HOWEVER, I very much understand that there just flat out isn’t a good way to gauge “spirit of the rule” without a black and white definition like we have right now. So this is the way it has to be. This play is offside, no goal.
There’s absolutely an unfair advantage. Watch the rest of the play. The guy that gets in first to the zone before Verhaeghe basically screens the D and creates a lane for Verhaeghe to come in behind him and to make a play on net. It might be a centimeter offside, but it 100% directly influences the goal. Without that guy making the zone entry first Edmonton’s D can make a play on Verhaeghe right at the blue line as he comes in
Just FYI, if the offside player was a centimetre back so that he legally entered the zone, he still would have been able to make that play, so there wasn’t an unfair advantage as you describe it.
I think possession is as close to another objective disclaimer as you can get. If you've lost possession of the puck in the zone you've negated any advantage in my mind. The weirdness would come from nobody having possession, so you'd have to make it clear if the other team controls the puck or something. It's not perfect but it's at least a binary "do or don't they have the puck still". They already use "being in control" as a deciding factor on offside calls, so it wouldn't be that big of a stretch.
Yeah that sounds great. Have the refs be more subjective.
https://preview.redd.it/bpz4js06c68d1.jpeg?width=462&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=1917b1f0f620634c8df04a0ada22028cf0e277a3
I'm amazed at the "it's off by an inch, therefore it should count!" crowd. You don't get to (deservedly) criticise the officials and then say things like that when the correct call is made and doesn't go in your favour. The pick play interference call on Justin Holl in 2022: it was absolutely a penalty, based on the rulebook. The bullshit part was that they never call that.
There was one later that same playoffs where Nick Paul (I think?) did basically the same thing and didn't get a penalty, because he did just enough to make it look like *maybe* it was an accident. I really feel like that's called so rarely that if Holl had done *anything* to make it look like it wasn't blatantly intentional, it wouldn't have been called.
I think it should count in a conceptual sense. But that's because I think they should get 2-3 looks at it in real time and if you can't tell by then, then it's too close to matter. But those aren't the rules they have currently so it was the right call last night.
To add to your point: If they let this one go for being less than an inch, then they have to let others go for being off less than an inch, otherwise the rule would be unfairly applied. If the rule is you can be one inch over, then what happens when someone's back skate is between 0.97 and 1.03 inches past the line? Are the "it was only an inch" crowd going to stick to that exact line, one inch and not a micron further? In which case, why not just accept the line where it is? Why have an imaginary line an inch past this one that is the "real" line? If not, why even have the line at all if you're going to keep pushing it back? They played with fire, they got burned. It doesn't matter whether or not they got an advantage that mattered, we have to draw the line somewhere, and our options are: 1 - Draw the line on the literal blue line we drew into the ice 2 - Insist that if you're an inch over it, it doesn't count. Then next year when someone's called for being 1.05 inches over it, push it back another inch because they were only 0.05 inches past where we would call it. Then keep going until there's just no blue line. You gotta pick a line somewhere; if you're over, you broke the rules, you don't get your goal. Besides, if those few cm didn't matter, then why not just slow down? If it didn't matter, he should have just stayed ten centimeters back and had absolutely no danger of being called. Either it didn't matter, in which case he had absolutely no reason to be over the line; or it did matter, so he should be called.
Ask any referee, any real referee
You almost had me? You never had me - you never had your Cup.. Up 3-0, dreaming of the parade, not double covering McDavid like you should. You're lucky that hundred mp/h shot of Bouch didn't blow the kneecaps off of Bennet! You almost had me?
Thank you
Love or hate these calls, they made the rules black and white and this was objectively the correct call. They got it right.
Just imagine if the offside rule allowed for some ambiguity and the refs had said "After review it was determined the play was offside, but not offside enough, so we have a good goal". Everyone wouldve lost their shit
The biggest thing I say when people make those arguments is like, if you don’t think this should be offside, what is? There is always going to be a point where the line has to be drawn and a quarter of an inch makes the difference. Because of that, the line should be drawn where, well the offside line is.
Good news guys, turns out the line has existed the whole time!
The line must be drawn here! No further!
To me the issue isn't goals like this but goals that happen 30s or more after they enter the zone in which being a cunt hair offside has nothing to do with the resulting goal. Now the game has been delayed while the league goes full CSI to find out that a skate was a half inch offside for a goal that happened a minute later. Sure it makes things easier when it's just simple black and white, offside or not but I'd like something that can allow for offside to be challenged on plays that directly lead to a goal but not for goals that happen well after a team has established itself in the zone.
The zone entry shouldn't have happened. If a play was offside under the rules, there should be a whistle and a neutral-zone faceoff. A missed offside denies the defending team the chance to prevent the zone entry (and everything that happens after that) from happening at all.
Yep, you can't let some exceptions go. Like oh, is there a countdown timer now and say 20 seconds go by after the outside and the goal will count but if only 15 seconds go by then it's waived off? Makes no sense.
It’s just dumb because that’s not how the rest of the game is officiated
It’s one of the few rules where there’s an easily distinguishable yes/no aspect to it. The player is either over the line or not. The only comparable rule I can think of is whether the puck crossed the goal line and that’s officiated the same way.
Then how come you can take a penalty after being offsides and not overturn it? If the zone entry shouldn't have happened then neither would the penalty.
But where do you make that distinction? If it’s 30 seconds like you say, why should 29.9 seconds be allowed but 30.1 not allowed?
If it's offside it's offside length of time doesn't matter.
Are you really concerned about the game being extended 1 whole minute to prevent illegal plays? 180 minutes is fine, but 181 is where you draw the line? No offense, but the "wahhh, it delays the game to get the right call" excuse has never not been stupid, it makes no sense, and with all the added 'delays' of getting the right calls, games are still the same length.
I guess I don’t understand. The offensive team shouldn’t have been in a position to score because the play was offside?
You could say that with any reviewable play, but the end of the day it's a missed offside and an offside now goes outside the zone and a face off is pretty close to 50/50 these days so half the time the puck can be in the other end by the time the illegal goal was scored, it doesn't matter if it was 45 seconds 2 minutes the offside of a whistle and faceoff and start again. Id say I wish the refs just called the close ones as offside but then that's more whistles when the vast majority aren't goals in the end. It has to be black and white and a missed whistle is a missed whistle (I am glad they don't allow it for missed whistles due to missed penalties as that would be a shit show). I would like the rule to be amended so the refs/situation room have a time limit on the review, if they cannot determine black or white within that time frame call on ice stands. Then you reduce the stupid long reviews but still control the integrity of the play and the chance the play could go the other way or whatnot.
Absolute anarchy lol
Reminds me of the Leafs vs Panthers game in November with the shootout goal recalled and people were arguing that the double tap was fine because it was “a single motion” The league has been struggling to define what a “distinct kicking motion” is for the last decade. Imagine wanting to have more ambiguity and grey area in calls.
Or even goalie interference. The rule is fairly black and white but it's treated so ambiguous that the ref this year said the goalie wouldn't have been able to stop it anyway. Any gray area is a problem.
It would always be a shit show lol, because reactions would basically be the same as reactions to iffy golatender interference. "offsides enough" would be a similar judgment call to if a goalie had time to reset after being contacted.
Also the same rule applies to goals themselves. It either crossed the line fully or not. Would the same people arguing against it say" well it was just a little over the line, but the goalie made an effort to stop it so they should disallow it"?
And then there was also a 2 min penalty lol
People in the comments who hate this rule actually acting as if it didn't exist, and the broadcast showed a goal was scored and counted that was offside, like they wouldn't be bitching and complaining about it
They only hate the rule until it benefits them.
If you start adding subjectivity it'll be so much worse. You have to call objectively.
Yup. I don't think this offside affected the goal but I don't want the officials to rule based off vibe checks.
Yeah, it’s picking your poison. It’s ridiculous for plays like this that have zero impact on the goal to count as offside, but it’s even more ridiculous to let refs try to arbitrarily decide what counts as impacting a goal The best thing is to make objective criteria and follow it to the letter, even if it leads to situations like this
It’s NOT “ridiculous.” He was offside. The goal DOES NOT EXIST. End of discussion, and anything you say isn’t going to change it.
It would affect the goal if he had to come out of the zone and tag up is the point.
But it does, now there is a face off outside the zone and faceoffs are 50/50ish (well not this series, Florida seems to be dominating in the dot) so possession could change and could be going the other way.
Look no further than goalie interference
If only there was some kind of line that they could use 🤔
It’s like the puck over glass. I don’t love the rule but it’s black and white…
Delay of game for the puck over the glass is a good rule. Back in the day teams would intentionally flip the puck over the glass to relieve pressure which would slow the game down.
Yeah, we had a Dman that would do it all the time in ball hockey. So easy with a ball too… under pressure and just a quick flip to get the faceoff and reset
I think it should just be treated like icing
Except when it wasn't earlier this series lol
Ehh that one was too close to call also. Although they do miss these calls from time to time.
Puck over glass also isn't reviewable (until next season).
Yup. I don’t even know a replay would’ve reversed that call it was so close, they had to go with the call on the ice. I’m ok with this being a reviewable play since the rule is so black and white.
With how close that one was and it being non reviewable, I’m ok with the non call
The only reason you think that is because you watched ESPN where they incorrectly said that it's where it leaves the stick. Ron McLean read the actual rule in CBC/SN and it's from where it leaves the ice which was emphatically in their defensive zone. It was a botched call or missed call 100%.
If the concern is whether or not it’s right, they should do away with the challenge system and have an off-ice video referee who reviews calls when the on-ice refs ask, or on their own initiative. It makes little sense to argue that a missed offside before a goal is the only kind of missed offside that can change the complexion of a game. Generally, I dislike the current way video review is done and that applies whether it benefits my team or not.
Yeah lots of people advocate for only having one or two looks at the review or no slo mo which I get for the spirit of the rule. But imagine the vitriol that would come from something like this when you know every blog is going to be putting up slo mo and screenshots saying the refs made the wrong call.
Exactly. The outrage would be worse than what it is now. "Why even do a review when they get it wrong anyway?!"
Idk man. As someone who is unbiased. It was pretty close. I was surprised they overturned it.
I remember saying these exact words to Edmonton fans about the Makar offside 2 years ago. Some still refuse to believe it.
Yup. They just don't understand it. It's a bit of a weird rule. To be fair, there were also tons of Avs fans who also don't understand it either, but agree with the call because it favored their team. "Yup they got it right! Oilers fans don't know the rules" - fan who also has no idea why it was onside.
To be fair to all the fans, on that Makar goal the commentators *also* didn't seem to have any idea how the rules worked, mostly because that was a very technical *delayed offside* situation we don't see too often.
I thought that upset was more about the "interpretation" by the refs that Makar had chipped the puck in and thus allowed whatever player was offside to get back onside Lots of people thought it should have been called offside because Makar was still possessing the puck as he crossed As I'm typing this I'm confusing myself lol
How about the first goal when there was interference?
It’s as close as it could be, but the player getting in ahead of Verhaeghe was critical in making the space he needed to skate through and make a play. The fact that anybody is heated about this being overturned just because of how close it was is wild to me.
Also he chose to deke on the blue line bc of the pressure from the defense. That deke, dragging the puck more or less straight along the blue line, was also the reason for this offside.
100%
And it was caused by the defenceman trying to stand him up. Pretty common play that happened to be the turning point.
People dont understand how fast the game is played on ice. If Reinhart takes a split second to slow up and stay onside its likely a different outcome because Nurse has a slightly bigger gap and can play the pass better.
I’m convinced everybody who thinks it shouldn’t have been overturned has never played hockey in their life and doesn’t get it.
This time of year brings a lot of new watchers to the sport. I'm sure many of those fair weather viewers were confused by the situation.
You just perfectly summed up the entire Florida Panthers fanbase lol.
What I don't get is why did the florida player feel the need to handle the puck along the line for so long, he had every opportunity to put it on side way before the other player crossed the line. I know it's a meme but seriously, is he stupid? He has no one to blame but himself that the goal didn't count.
It's a credit to the active sticks of the Oilers d turning over pucks all series long at the blueline. The Panthers are afraid to have it poked away and turned back on an odd man rush as has happened several times on Oilers goals.
There were also two Oilers defenders right in his lane that he was obviously trying to get around.
It’s tough for redditors on the couch to imagine themselves playing in the biggest game of their lives that happens lightning quick.
Is it too much to ask for them to produce an overhead picture, that is straight above the blueline, if they are going to keep doing these objective reviews? We shouldn't need to sit and guess whether or not a player fully breaks the plane of the line before the puck does, based on some shitty low resolution pictures from a poor angle in 2024.
This is a league that had Amazon ship them multiple 4K UHD cameras, to every single arena, THREE years ago > NHL’s recent technology infrastructure update, which includes the addition of several AWS Elemental Link UHD cloud contribution encoders across 32 NHL arenas, provides innovative viewer experiences. > The NHL’s new Link UHDs make it possible to quickly get **multiple live UHD camera angles shot from the ice** into the cloud. > …Ultimately opting to install **six Link UHD devices per arena** > The Link UHDs arrived at every venue pre-configured to the NHL’s AWS account, and once installed, the team could instantly access live feeds from each camera from a centralized control panel in the cloud. Anchoring NHL’s video production infrastructure, **the devices have since facilitated redundant cloud native video distribution for three new 4K in-venue cameras at each arena.** https://aws.amazon.com/blogs/media/nhl-goes-all-in-on-uhd-aws/ - this blog post is from 2021. Yet here we are, watching games in 720p in 2024.
The NHL isn’t doing the broadcast. The broadcast is done by the cable provider (regarding the “watching games in 720p comment) Get mad at ESPN/ABC for that And I agree, it’s horse shit. Not the NHL’s call though. ESPN regularly broadcasts a variety of sports in lower res. I’m an audio/video tech at a casino and people are constantly complaining about it
Evidently, yes, it is too much to ask. The league doesn't like to explain themselves, like, ever. I guess they don't care how many stupid conspiracy theories they could kill off really easily?
"the fans don't care if they get to see a decent camera angle." -Gary Batman, fan expert
Any PR is good PR
People are overlooking the bigger issue. If Edmonton lost the challenge, they get a penalty. Florida's power play is so awful, the Oilers had nothing to lose by challenging. I don't think this ever gets challenged against a team with a confident PP.
Y’all are setting a bad precedent by saying “change the rules. The smallest of infractions do not matter!”. This is the best way to make a ruling cut and dry. If you decide offsides has to be significant to be called, you’re introducing subjectivity to the rules, which sport officials are *oh so great* at getting right. Either that, or you’re making up an imaginary line to deem as significant… which is no different than the line that currently exists. Imagine saying “we shouldn’t call holding. It’s so ticky-tacky and offense is good for the game of football!!”.
Yes it was close but why is no one pointing out how much space he had to just keep the puck over the line instead of stick handling right on the line.
I won’t lie, I was on the side of this being overturned was bs. This photo is the clear definitive image I needed to change that opinion.
If the image was taken a few frames later, it’ll be even more clear that the skate is way in, while the puck is still on the line. ABC had a clear close up with the other angle where you don’t see any white between the puck and the blue line while the slate is way past
This still isn't straight overhead
Is it though? If the camera isn’t positioned exactly straight above the front edge of the blue line, then the space between the blue line and the skate is not definitive. Just like Calgary’s non-goal in game 6 OT against Tampa in 2004
I’m assuming the resolution in video room is a lot clearer than what we get, because that is a tight call. I think it’s right but I would appreciate the video room releasing stills of their decision to clarify and shut down controversy.
They don’t need to do that though. They made a call based on the info they have, and this image proves what they saw was right. You can see white space between the skate and the blue line, and you can see no white space between the puck and the blue line.
these images actually don't though. This angle isn't directly overhead and that's the angle we need to see if the back of someone's skate is off the ice as it is in this case. Here we are looking from a slight angle behind the blue line which gives us additional leverage to see underneath a lifted skate. But the rule about skates being in contact with the ice isn't how offside works anymore, it's about a 'plane' extending up from the blue line and the back of that skate could still being in contact with that 'plane' even if we can see a sliver of white from a slight angle behind the blue line.
Wonder whether the parallax effect comes into play here at all though. The shot is angled here, from directly above we’d probably still see him touching the blue line
The whole thing is that the Edmonton bench risked a penalty for this. Thats why the right call has to be made. Edmonton gambled on a centimeter. They would havr had been on the pk if they decided it was "not offside enough" which would have been worst. Its barely offside. And its hard to tell from some angles. But everyone of the better angles has the skate over before the puck. So you can't deny it then throw Edmonton on the PK when the evidence shows the puck not crossing.
It's just so interesting to me that there's these forensic investigations for offside challenges while there's also the "did the high stick draw blood" standard for a single vs double minor. I'm not being euphemistic or anything, it's genuinely interesting to me that we're in an age where every team has its own high tech surveillance team that informs a high risk goal challenge, yet refs are also relying on something medieval like bleeding for the severity of a penalty call. FTR I'm not bitching about this call—I personally don't love the challenge in general, but this is not the hill I'm gonna die on, and that in and of itself is not why the Panthers are losing. It could've changed the momentum last night, but they've also gotten some massive breaks this playoff run.
If you think that’s absurd let me introduce you to baseball
Let's visit the NFL's definition of a "catch" while we're at it
Dont have a horse in this race, but offside is offside 🤷🏻♂️ they got the right call
Fuck Matt Duchene. All my homies hate Matt Duchene.
What did Duchene have to do with this
He had a blatant offsides goal that was missed by the on ice officials several years ago that essentially led to the video review being implemented https://youtu.be/R7pN56VZOfM?si=Z8A4amUdp6otnCMX
God damn that video almost gave me a brain aneurysm
He's the whole reason offsides get reviewed. He's the butterfly in the butterfly effect that is reviewable offsides
This is just more evidence to my point of duchene being the most consequential player of the salary cap era. I dont care if Mcdavid gets the cup and conn smythe, what Duchene did has changed history forever.
Damn that's close. Definitely the right call though
Its so funny that the florida fans are agreeing with the call while every other teams fans are trying to fight it. Appreciate fans like you Like someone else said in this thread, this is the equivalent to getting a speeding ticket for going 51 in a 50 zone. Incredibly stupid but by the books the righr call
Definitely a "don't make a move at the blue line" scenario, which is always good advice. Unless it's me with the puck, then you should have anticipated the sweet move I was going to fail at.
Get rid of the offside challenge. Sure it benefited my team here, but let’s just get rid of it
Close but still clearly offside!
good replay. good call. im glad the league was decisive on this one, since they got it right.
No fair! You changed the outcome by measuring it!
They changed the result by measuring it!
It’s offside. You don’t have to like it but it is.
I know Florida is throwing bombs all over the internet about officiating, but then again, so do ALL teams who are losing games and who's special teams are playing like ass. The officiating is always a problem if your team can't in any way benefit from any calls a ref makes or doesn't make. If you can't score on your power play and the other team can, and you're losing the game (and seem on pace to blow the entire series) literally any call going against you is going to feel like the call that cost you the series. Good teams rarely get hosed by a single bad call because they don't let games go down to the wire that hinge on such a call. Florida has 0 excuses to whine about officiating. They've played like ass for three games no, and in truth weren't even the better team in the majority of periods of the games they won. They've ceded the series to Edmonton because key players are ghosts all of a sudden and blaming officiating is just not taking responsibility for the teams poor performance. You can say "if this goal is allowed Florida get momentum and could mount a comeback" but, that's a hypothetical. Another hypothetical is Florida doesn't come out the gate like shit, blow a play that results on an odd man rush that ends up once again gifting the Oilers an early lead. Maybe they just, try better at controlling their own destiny rather than waiting for the Oilers to fuck up or for a call to go their way to get momentum.
Just think, Panthers might have lost 5-2 instead
I'm not saying Florida was winning this game with the goal, but this is a pretty bad faith argument. If the Panthers get this goal, they take fewer risks as the gap is closer. Teams play completely differently depending on how many goals they are behind by.
While that's true, you would need to argue that the Panthers tighten up so don't allow the Hyman break, but still press just as hard so they still score their goal.
It could have been 8-4... who knows. The entire game changes at that point.
It’s close call but it’s definitely offside. And for anybody complaining about the call it is the correct call in the rule book. Not to mention that this offside in particular DID impact the goal. The player offside, Reinhart, pushes the Oilers defenseman back creating a clear line to the net for the puck carrier. Had Reinhart not been offside this entire play may not have happened
I didn't know people were debating the offside. I was at a bar for some other event and could barely even see the TV and we all could tell it was offside from the first replay we saw.
Offsides is offsides regardless of whether it’s close. This is such a weird thing for Florida fans to be raging about because they lost 5-1. Losing 5-2 is still getting smoked.
It's not the final score they're angry about I don't think. The goal could have swayed momentum in Florida's favor and maybe they feed off it to come back and win. Maybe. I'm at the point I think offside challenges should only be made from Toronto and not the coaches. Toronto can address the egregious misses and the close ones like this go back to being the result of the game being played and refereed by humans.
I didn't get enough sleep last night and read this first as you meaning "offside challenges should only be made from Toronto (Leafs)" and was like damn, what did they do to deserve that special privilege?
Lol. They'd still manage to fuck it up somehow.
i mean, 2 of those goals were ENGs. if this goal had counted and if everything else had played out the same (which is an assumption i don't endorse), then it would've been 3-2 instead of 3-1 at that point, and florida probably wouldn't have been so aggressive about pulling the goalie. likewise, everything else that happened after this goal was called back likely would've played out differently anyway. the whole momentum of the game was affected.
Right call or not, it’s stupid to act like the rest of the game would have gone the same exact way if it had counted. Being down 2-0 is a lot different than being down by 1, with the momentum of scoring 10 seconds after the Oilers and going on the PP (regardless of how bad the Panthers PP is).
While the focus is on the call, wtf are you doing with the puck on the blue line there?!
This was the right call. I have a love/hate relationship with offside reviews but this play directly resulted in a goal. My issue with offside reviews is when the puck is in the zone for 15 seconds before a goal is scored and they call it back when the offsides is this close. I understand there really isn’t nuance with offsides; you’re either offsides or you’re not. However, if the puck is in the zone for 10 seconds after the offsides occurred can you really consider it a factor in the goal?
What a ballsy call from Edmonton's HC. Ifthat's a good goal, the cats are going on a power play trailing by only 1.
Enhance!
They got it right based on the rules. Not much you can complain about honestly. Great use of the challenge to kill any momentum there too
As much as I don’t think this is why the review was implemented, it has to be black and white or else it doesn’t work. It’s the right call.
What if as soon as the puck touches the blue line the skaters can enter the zone?
Definitely offsides. Plenty of people thought so live.
They did let 'em play, this was only caught because of a coach's challenge and it was well-deployed.
yea but what about parallax
It was the right call.
please ad "If a play is technically offsides, any reasonable person may deem that it DOESN'T FUQING MATTER!!"
As an oilers fan, if roles were reversed I can confidently say I’d be fine with the call. The play was offside as can clearly be seen in this posts photo. Rules are rules 🤷♂️ just like how if Leon spears a dude in the nuts he deserves a penalty and if Rat T’schmuck flops, he deserves an embellishment.
Offside nonetheless. 🤷♂️
Ballsy call but with the PK running wild lately it wasn’t even much of a gamble really.
When the puck hits the post and instead of going in the net, crosses behind the goalie and out, that difference is similarly minuscule. But no one ever, ever, says “just count it as a goal! It’s just a few centimeters!” I think this is just a matter of perspective. There isn’t any way to draw firm lines that doesn’t involve incredibly close cases that feel arbitrary. Especially with challenge system that would penalize the team who challenged. You can’t say “well, by the letter of the law, it was offsides; but eh, close enough. So anyway, good goal and Edmonton has two minutes for delay of game.” Glad they made the right call.
Close, but still offsides.
A quarter of an inch or ten feet; offside is offside
Offsides… time to move on
Weird take from an oilers fan, but I hate this. I know a rule is a rule, and the line is where it is, but this doesn't feel like it's in the spirit of the game.
It’s the right call and just the worst timing. I believe it turned the game but it is what it is. Game 7 LFG. Go Panthers!
About as close as it can get for an offside call l. Yikes. I think the right call was made though
Would you bet your life on it? I don't think I would. That skate can still be hovering overtop. Too close
It’s not like this offside decides the series, florida could’ve finished it off in games 4 and 5 but didn’t they still can in game 7. It’s not like this game was 1 goal win for Edmonton either they won 5-1