To me, an offside play should be an easy review. It shouldn't take 10 minutes to determine if a play is offside or not. If it's not that clear cut, then it's a good goal.
- HonkFortheGoose

Here is my thing on the offside review, if that same play does not happen and we turn it over on there end and a player goes down on a breakaway and scores on US, we can't challenge that OUR player was offside and they play should of been dead. The golatender interference and stuff like that i understand, but the offsides thing is a little ridiculous for that reason. It should go both ways.

He makes the most sense, only one year left on his deal and Carolina has Eddie Lack. I'd prefer Hiller but with the way Ramo played the other day I'm not sure they'll be so quick to trade Hiller.
- chilliard77

And I don't think going with an un-proven younger guy is a good idea. We need a veteran, preferably on a short contract.

He makes the most sense, only one year left on his deal and Carolina has Eddie Lack. I'd prefer Hiller but with the way Ramo played the other day I'm not sure they'll be so quick to trade Hiller.
- chilliard77

i would take ramo or hiller over that loser ..

i hate all the Carolina players in that cup run

the fact they got the right call makes the game so much better


the fact it took 6 or 7 minutes is a disgrace
- homiedclown

no issue with the coach's challenge...just with the fact that it took so long to do it

there better be it's game one and we're already (frank)ed
- gerbe75pts

Yep.

no issue with the coach's challenge...just with the fact that it took so long to do it
- feetontheair22

Same . Pretty much every ones opinion i have talked with.

i would take ramo or hiller over that loser ..

i hate all the Carolina players in that cup run
- gerbe75pts

Couldnt agree more still get sick when i see rod brind'amour's nose

no issue with the coach's challenge...just with the fact that it took so long to do it
- feetontheair22

I don't have an issue with the challenge, but I feel like if it's really that blatant/obvious to overturn a goal, it shouldn't take 10 minutes to figure it out. In a game that moves as fast as this one does, offsides should probably be called a lot more often than it is based on that review yesterday.

I don't have an issue with the challenge, but I feel like if it's really that blatant/obvious to overturn a goal, it shouldn't take 10 minutes to figure it out. In a game that moves as fast as this one does, offsides should probably be called a lot more often than it is based on that review yesterday.
- HonkFortheGoose

Think last night it was the linesmen debating on who missed the call. A Challenge could really screw their progress evaluation down the road.

do not want
- gerbe75pts

Would consider. His performance last year was a direct result of team in front of him. Anton Khudobin, Hiller, Scott Darling.

I don't have an issue with the challenge, but I feel like if it's really that blatant/obvious to overturn a goal, it shouldn't take 10 minutes to figure it out. In a game that moves as fast as this one does, offsides should probably be called a lot more often than it is based on that review yesterday.
- HonkFortheGoose

What happens on that play where we are offsides and they bring it down and score? No goal right? Should go both ways for that. I dont like the time it takes or the offsides calls. You have Lineman whos only job is to watch the blue line.

Why the rush to go out and trade for a goaltender?

This is far from a playoffs or bust type of season.

Sit tight, ride it out, and when Lehner is healthy again, let him play and see what we have.

The long term goal still needs to be of greatest importance.

Why the rush to go out and trade for a goaltender?

This is far from a playoffs or bust type of season.

Sit tight, ride it out, and when Lehner is healthy again, let him play and see what we have.

The long term goal still needs to be of greatest importance.
- kingcong39

Agreed. I also think this could be a good time to find out what you've really got in the pipe. Since the odds of us making the playoffs this year are pretty stacked against us (based off of previous season to season improvements in the history of the league) then you have nothing to lose really in testing out the guys in the organization.

What happens on that play where we are offsides and they bring it down and score? No goal right? Should go both ways for that. I dont like the time it takes or the offsides calls. You have Lineman whos only job is to watch the blue line.
- CoHo_to_B-Lo

What happens when you enter the zone illegally (Not called) the first time and it is quickly chipped back out. you then rush right back in and score. Can you challenge that the play is dead and that second rush should not have happened?

What happens on that play where we are offsides and they bring it down and score? No goal right? Should go both ways for that. I dont like the time it takes or the offsides calls. You have Lineman whos only job is to watch the blue line.
- CoHo_to_B-Lo

I've seen goals scored when teams are clearly offsides that should have been called back. I'm fine with reviewing those. I think Chicago had one in the playoffs this past year that shouldn't have counted if I'm remembering correctly. But it seriously would have only taken about 30 seconds to review as it was obvious enough that Helen Keller could have seen it.

Yesterday's challenge was over a mere inch or so. They need to set a time limit for reviews I think. If it was so plainly offsides, then it shouldn't take over 7 minutes to make that determination.

What happens when you enter the zone illegally (Not called) the first time and it is quickly chipped back out. you then rush right back in and score. Can you challenge that the play is dead and that second rush should not have happened?
- ImThatGuy

Exactly. It makes no sense that, that is part of the challenge options. The other 2 make sense. The offsides does not.

What happens when you enter the zone illegally (Not called) the first time and it is quickly chipped back out. you then rush right back in and score. Can you challenge that the play is dead and that second rush should not have happened?
- ImThatGuy

These are some of the things that I think they need to work out. It's also why I don't know that challenges are good for this sport in particular. In football, the plays are so much more separated. Run a play. Stop. Run a play. Stop. It doesn't work that way in hockey. It's a much more fluid sport.

I've seen goals scored when teams are clearly offsides that should have been called back. I'm fine with reviewing those. I think Chicago had one in the playoffs this past year that shouldn't have counted if I'm remembering correctly. But it seriously would have only taken about 30 seconds to review as it was obvious enough that Helen Keller could have seen it.

Yesterday's challenge was over a mere inch or so. They need to set a time limit for reviews I think. If it was so plainly offsides, then it shouldn't take over 7 minutes to make that determination.
- HonkFortheGoose

But what if OTT scores on that same whistle? Then what? Can WE challenge that WE were offsides?


And the player who scored was not offsides, as well as it happened well after the "offsides" occured. That part of the challenge needs to go. It does not make sense and there is way to many what ifs. Keep in to goalie interference and high sticks and things like that around the net.

I still stick with 5 of or more goalies that will suit up for the Sabres this year.

Lehner - out 4-6 weeks
Johnson- not a #1
Lieuwen?
Makarov?
Ullmark?
Hiller?

I have a feeling we are just getting started with the goalie carousel.

I've seen goals scored when teams are clearly offsides that should have been called back. I'm fine with reviewing those. I think Chicago had one in the playoffs this past year that shouldn't have counted if I'm remembering correctly. But it seriously would have only taken about 30 seconds to review as it was obvious enough that Helen Keller could have seen it.

Yesterday's challenge was over a mere inch or so. They need to set a time limit for reviews I think. If it was so plainly offsides, then it shouldn't take over 7 minutes to make that determination.
- HonkFortheGoose

I actually hate it. This is a sport where it is already mind numbing slow at times, where both teams are playing one fore checker and four men back. Now you are going to slow it down even more.

So less powerplays and now reviews that take goals away. A team to slow down action or to break a teams momentum is not going to call a timeout, they will ask for review instead they know they are going to lose. You get a 30 second timeout or a 3-4 minute review. you lose the timeout anyway.

Pretty easy decision

I actually hate it. This is a sport where it is already mind numbing slow at times, where both teams are playing one fore checker and four men back. Now you are going to slow it down even more.

So less powerplays and now reviews that take goals away. A team to slow down action or to break a teams momentum is not going to call a timeout, they will ask for review instead they know they are going to lose. You get a 30 second timeout or a 3-4 minute review. you lose the timeout anyway.

Pretty easy decision
- ImThatGuy

I'm waiting for game 7 OT goal in playoffs after team jumps on ice other coach challenges just to stop the celebration and be a jerk

I actually hate it. This is a sport where it is already mind numbing slow at times, where both teams are playing one fore checker and four men back. Now you are going to slow it down even more.

So less powerplays and now reviews that take goals away. A team to slow down action or to break a teams momentum is not going to call a timeout, they will ask for review instead they know they are going to lose. You get a 30 second timeout or a 3-4 minute review. you lose the timeout anyway.

Pretty easy decision
- ImThatGuy

exactly.

I'm waiting for game 7 OT goal in playoffs after team jumps on ice other coach challenges just to stop the celebration and be a jerk
- Fattony1187

If it happens in the playoffs this year against Pitt or CHI, it wont be a rule next year.

To me, an offside play should be an easy review. It shouldn't take 10 minutes to determine if a play is offside or not. If it's not that clear cut, then it's a good goal.
- HonkFortheGoose

Yea that was ridiculous. It ruined the game. Its like they were trying to figure out how to use the tablet

But what if OTT scores on that same whistle? Then what? Can WE challenge that WE were offsides?


And the player who scored was not offsides, as well as it happened well after the "offsides" occured. That part of the challenge needs to go. It does not make sense and there is way to many what ifs. Keep in to goalie interference and high sticks and things like that around the net.
- CoHo_to_B-Lo

things i think should be reviewable.

Goalie interference on goals
High stick on goals
Kicking motion on goals (I think kicking should be allowed but that is just me)
High stick penalty. If a player is found to not have been hit with a high stick they get a 4 minute diving/embellishment major instead.

Offsides, not reviewable.