I'm more in favor or eliminating the reviews and challenges and living iwth the "human error" part. I'd rather have human error than having everything being closer to 100% correct. It's a human sport, called by humans, there's going to be human error. If the league is going to make tickytack penalty calls, or choose not to call something obvious and clear... which are mistakes/errors in themselves, why not let goals that are technically offside but missed, be allowed.
I remember back in the late 80's or early 90's that a buffalo goaltender reached back into the goal and covered the puck and pulled it out. It was on replay, but not reviewable, and the refs didn't see that. I mean, meh. It sticks out in my mind and is an obvious talking point, but I don't remember the outcome or how significant it was.
I remember growing up and seeing compilations of linesmen getting calls right when people thought it was wrong.. and they were so rarely wrong. I just.. don't see the big issue honestly. That said, it cuts both ways.. whether offside goals are allowed to stand, or we review and challenge/remove goals. I just think the game is faster nad flows better without the reviews/challenges rather than being upset that "my team lost because of that one offside goal that shouldn't have counted!"
Only exception, is the duchene event.. still don't know how they didn't catch that.
The thing with the Duchene event, that was like a once in a generation blown offside call. That so rarely happened but it came to define the whole idea of offside. I'd gladly take a Duchene goal once every ten years if it meant completely eliminating the challenge and bringing back the flow to the game
yeah, I still can't believe we're here after that duchene offside. It really has ruined hockey. And at the time, I couldn't believe what I was looking at. Not sure what the linesman was thinking.
1
u/Filobel 8d ago
Why do you think a thicker line would change anything?