One of the best things about the NHL is they want to get things right. Arguably, they don't aways succeed, but they put forth the best effort of any of the four major sports.
Some great examples of this are evidenced just this week.
First, Dennis Wideman of the Washington Capitals (a defenseman!) had his first NHL hat trick this week. In fact, I think I read somewhere that this was Wideman's first hat trick in all of his hockey life.
Or did he?
A review by the NHL took away the third goal and gave it to Brooks Laich who deflected it into the net. After the game, Wideman said he felt it went off Laich's stick, but at the time of the interview, it was still a Wideman goal.
I don't think Wideman was upset by this, but it goes to show how committed the NHL is to getting things right. They aren't afraid to go back and change things like scoring. Nor are they afraid to go back and add supplimental discipline for actions, even if they go unnoticed or uncalled by the referee at the time.
But my absolute favorite thing is the Video Judge and Situation Room.
Quick note, did you know the Situation Room has a blog? It just shows replays from games where they were contacted concerning potential goals.
Anyway, the Video Judge has the ability / authority / reponsibility to review any potential goal or to insure the proper time is on the clock, when needed. He acts somewhat independently of the on-ice officials meaning that he can delay a faceoff if there's a situation he wants to look at more closely. He can also be asked to look at things more closely when asked by on-ice officials.
He doesn't see who scored the goals, just if they are good goals. The scoring is done by the Official Scorer. The Scorers decision can be changed, either by him during the game or post-game by the League if needed.
The Goal Judge doesn't have the ability to change his opinion after the puck has dropped following a possible goal. Once there is a face-off, whatever the ruling was on the ice is final. He can delay the faceoff to use more time if needed and is bound by the rules to review every possible goal then relay his decision to the on-ice officials.
For obvious, run of the mill-goals, he simply calls down to an off-ice official who gives the thumbs up. If there is a need to delay the face off because it's a little bit more complicated, the PA Announcer will say "The play is under review". You can then see the on-ice officials talking with the Video Judge via telephone to get input, discuss the situation, and relay his final decision.
Here's a list of what the Video Judge can look at as defined by Rule 38:
1) Puck crossing the goal line
2) Puck in the net prior to goal frame being dislodged
3) Puck in net prior to or after time expires in a period
4) Puck directed in by hand or distinct kicking motion
5) Puck off an official into net
6) Puck off a high stick
7) Establish time on clock
8) Make sure goals are "good hockey goals" (didn't go under the net or through the netting, etc.
If there is not video evidence that clearly shows what happened, the call on the ice stands.
Now, here's where the NHL really gets things right. The Goal Judge is not alone in his decision making process. If he isn't quite sure, he can call the Situation Room (the League Hockey Operations and Officiating Office) to get them to look at a potential goal or no goal.
Think seeing a goal is easy? Well, think again. These are some great examples of how the system works and examples of what the Goal Judge looks for.
First, a game between the Flyers and the Lightning. The Referee sees a goal and immediately signals one. However, the puck remains on the ice and not behind the goalie in the net. The puck seems to have gone through the net. He quickly tells that to the players on the ice and then skates right over to the phone to talk to the Video Judge and ask for a ruling.
Good goal, Lightning. The on-ice official got it right and it was confirmed upstairs.
Now, how about puck over the goal line before time expires? The puck must completely cross the goal line for it to count as a goal. If there is any part still touching the line, it is no goal. We look again to Philadelphia for an example, this time against the Sharks.
No goal. It didn't go in. The Sharks won the shootout by the way. The on-ice official got it wrong, but it was corrected.
To show an example of what COMPLETELY over the goal line means, I give you one of the most interesting examples in NHL history:
No goal. Stop made, so Phoenix's goal counted. Now, if it had been determined that the puck crossed the line, that would be a Calgary goal and nothing else would have counted after that, including the Phoenix goal.
Two quick things that this video shows. First, it give a great example as to why they NHL added clear plastic instead of white padding just off the posts. It makes it easier for officials to see the goal line.
Second, completely over the line does not mean touching the ice. It is clear that all parts of the puck touching the ice were over the line, but the curve of the puck was still on the line according to the overhead shot.
From this week, we get to compare what is a distinct kicking motion and what is not a distinct kicking motion. The rules essentially say the puck can go off a skate if there is no distinct kicking motion. You can kick it to your stick and in, but not just kicking it in.
First, a no-goal from Nashville as they played the Ducks.
And now a look at a deflection and not a kick from Dallas against Los Angeles (wearing those awesome throwback purple jerseys).
Let's stick with games this week. Almost all of the videos here are pretty obvious that a review is needed at the time. But are you curious as to when a puck might go in the net and not be detected by the referees? Want to see one of those situations where the Video Judge has to call them and tell them to delay a face-off? Below is an example of that this week. Curiously not only do the on-ice officials miss it, but the Goal Judge misses it, as well as all the players on both teams (or at least the Blue Jackets). No one protested for a review. Even the fans in Columbus and the television commentators missed the goal in the moment. It was the Video Judge that made the call and delayed the face-off.
Probably the best reaction is the woman in red wearing a white sweater and beer can in hand behind the Columbus bench. The look on her face is of absolute astonishment.
Now take a step back in time to when hockey fans in Atlanta, like myself, had a team to call their own. It's a Thrashers game against Carolina.
Who knew the puck couldn't go off directly off an official an into the goal? (Hockey Cop knew.)
Moment of silence please for the departed Thrashers.
Moving on.
Let's look at my least favorite NHL Referee of all time: Bill McCreary, also known by my social circle as Mr. Magoo.
This is a great example of "did the puck cross the line before the net was dislodged?" McCreary (not surprisingly) got the call wrong on the ice, but it was changed by video review. It also harckens back to the days when home teams wore white, something I wished the game would go back to (an opinion I have not always had).
For the record, McCreary is not liked by me and others because of one specific game in Atlanta where it just appeared to us that he was terribly biased against the Thrashers. It lead to our common symbol of indicating the ref made what we felt was a bad call. That signal? Holding up one arm (as in a delayed call) and then waving the fingers of the other hand under your nose (like a big mustache).
Here's an example of high sticking. Ignore the commentators before the call is explained on the ice by the Referee.
It was clearly hit with a Penguin high stick and clearly hit in by a Ranger arm. No goal. They found the rule book and corrected the misstatement from earlier. Yes, Rule 80.3 clearly states that "when an attacking player causes the puck to enter the opponent's goal by contacting the puck above the height of the crossbar, either directly or deflected off any player or official, the goal shall not be allowed."
Good on the ref for knowing the rule and quickly waving off Cooke's goal. And good to know that the NHL has been concerned with getting the call right by using video replay for over 20 years.
So there you go folks. Two reasons I think the NHL is just a great league. They are willing to re-write what they can in history and able to use technology (along with the League's Officiating Office) to get things right.
One thing the NHL does not use replays for in the game is the assessment of penalties. Such as fighting.
Sorry, I had to get that in there. I'm not the biggest Matt Cooke fan. Nor am I a huge fan of Sean Avery, a recent scratch from the Rangers' lineup. Both guys annoy me with their on-ice antics and bullying.
TTFN
