reviewing all goals would not make me want to watch hockey

it would be boring as hell for all the stoppages
- 2Real

its not reviewing all goals, like the refs would head over to the box and call up and review blah blah blah. no, blatant goals don't need to be reviewed, only goals where this is doubt. how many times does it honestly happen? there are games and games and games that go through the motions and all goals are no doubters. a review should be put in place for any goal that is in doubt, just like there already is the ability to review an off sides prior to a goal being scored.

in the end what is the difference?

refs missed this call too

https://streamable.com/s/188cb/lszmwh

its not reviewing all goals, like the refs would head over to the box and call up and review blah blah blah. no, blatant goals don't need to be reviewed, only goals where this is doubt. how many times does it honestly happen? there are games and games and games that go through the motions and all goals are no doubters. a review should be put in place for any goal that is in doubt, just like there already is the ability to review an off sides prior to a goal being scored.

in the end what is the difference?
- sjk540

i hate how coaches just call for goals to be reviewed out of desperation

it bores me to death

reviewing all goals would not make me want to watch hockey

it would be boring as hell for all the stoppages
- 2Real

You are under the impression that every goal has to have a stoppage for some reason. Goal celebrations alone are at least a minute long then factor in that people can watch live as well. The only reason long reviews take place is because they have a system implemented that has the official watching footage on ice level. A review could be done and ready to announce before the players all get set at center ice.

this was a goal too

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iyQswGcQiN0

To be honest with the technology available every sport could be called without officials, well with hockey you would need one to drop the puck and that's it. The only thing stopping that is the traditionalists who feel imperfection is part of the game, but in reality every game could be called flawless. Sports is about competition and it is suppose to show who is the best that game or that season or that playoffs, but as soon as mistakes are accepted that tarnishes true competition.

These same slo-motion replays are available to the refs, hell the coaches see the replays before the ref makes announcements on reviews. The problem with the system is the NHL cherry picks what gets reviewed and when. Every year the league has a meeting with ALL teams to sort this out, yet they decide to only discuss what is hot at the moment. This could of been all fleshed out decades ago.

Remember this obvious miscall wasn't missed by ONE ref...it was missed by FOUR officials, linesmen are allowed to communicated to the refs if they see something that is missed, but sadly ego plays a big part in it.
- Glak18

I agree with you for the most part. ALL GOALS SHOULD BE REVIEWED. However, do you want all "tripping", "hooking", "interference" calls to be reviewed? There has to be a limit.

The league can do more and not interrupt the game. There are obvious black/white calls that are missed right now. That needs to be corrected. Interpretive calls need to be left to the refs.

I love that the NHL games have a flow to them. I hate that NFL games are constantly interrupted by reviews. The NHL can get more right and still not derail the game with reviews. That is my point.

i hate how coaches just call for goals to be reviewed out of desperation

it bores me to death
- 2Real

You know what bores me....commercials and intermissions.

I agree with you for the most part. ALL GOALS SHOULD BE REVIEWED. However, do you want all "tripping", "hooking", "interference" calls to be reviewed? There has to be a limit.

The league can do more and not interrupt the game. There are obvious black/white calls that are missed right now. That needs to be corrected. Interpretive calls need to be left to the refs.

I love that the NHL games have a flow to them. I hate that NFL games are constantly interrupted by reviews. The NHL can get more right and still not derail the game with reviews. That is my point.
- mickel25

Goals and offsides are in my mind the easiest ones to review while not taking too long to do so, but penalties are a bit more complex.

Nothing infuriates me more than hearing an announcer say "looks like the refs put the whistle away". Why can officials play god and dictate a game that easy? A hook is ok in the first period, but it's cool because we are letting them play later in the game? It is one of the most toxic things in sports.

As a life long hockey player and fan of the game I have no clue what a penalty is anymore.

Also the NFL is a totally different beast of a subject. It is one of the most corrupted businesses in the world. It is the main reason I stopped watching.

Goals and offsides are in my mind the easiest ones to review while not taking too long to do so, but penalties are a bit more complex.

Nothing infuriates me more than hearing an announcer say "looks like the refs put the whistle away". Why can officials play god and dictate a game that easy? A hook is ok in the first period, but it's cool because we are letting them play later in the game? It is one of the most toxic things in sports.

As a life long hockey player and fan of the game I have no clue what a penalty is anymore.

Also the NFL is a totally different beast of a subject. It is one of the most corrupted businesses in the world. It is the main reason I stopped watching.
- Glak18

that's why you should just drill people at let the DOPS handle it

that's why you should just drill people at let the DOPS handle it
- 2Real

DOPS is a whole separate issue.

DOPS is a whole separate issue.
- mickel25

x2

DOPS is a whole separate issue.
- mickel25

You're taking this way too far guy. Every play does not need to be reviewed, every situation doesn't need to be reviewed, the point is that IF there is a doubt or question of a pivotal decision, it can be reviewed. You make it seem like every time a team tags up and enters the zone play will be stopped for it to be reviewed. I get that whole human element part, but if its blatantly wrong and blatantly flawed, why not change. Change is necessary, in sports, in work, in life. Why are you being so stubborn?


- sjk540

You're taking the same approach you took with SSB on the other thread. You're the one who is being stubborn and not paying attention. I said previously that any play CAN be reviewed. I think it's reasonable to say that every goal scored should be reviewed. I just don't want to see the league evolve into constant stoppages of play for who knows what on any play. We already have off sides reviews for entries that happened a significant time in the past. Where does it end? Where do we draw the line. That is my point if you would get off your high horse and stop worrying about people taking it too far you might learn something.

I also disagree with the second part of your statement, if you make it where they can review 1 or 2 calls a game, we're right back to where we are? No, because if that were true then we wouldn't be talking about this. That's all it really is, 1 or 2 plays a game that could be questionable. Most of the time refs have flawless games, however recently that hasn't been the case. I think everyone from the NHL on down would sleep better knowing that all plays were called right so that there was no question that the results were correct either. Yet you want to let games be called with glaring mistakes so that the results are maybe not should have happened, just because this is how its always been??? get outta here!
- sjk540

If we open up the kinds of plays that can be reviewed then after a team exhausts the number of reviews it can challenge, they were right back to having the potential of the human element making a mistake on a pivotal call.
I think it's rare for refs to have a flawless game. The human element of officiating is part of the game. Not my problem that you don't understand that.

Esa Lindell 6 years at 5.8. Not a direct comp but it’s notable for provorov. He’s a bonafide young first pairing dman and does a lot of heavy lifting. Provorov I think gets somewhere around 6.5 per long term

Esa Lindell 6 years at 5.8. Not a direct comp but it’s notable for provorov. He’s a bonafide young first pairing dman and does a lot of heavy lifting. Provorov I think gets somewhere around 6.5 per long term
- Just5

If we can get Provorov under contract for 6 or 7 years at 6.5 I would be ecstatic.

Esa Lindell 6 years at 5.8. Not a direct comp but it’s notable for provorov. He’s a bonafide young first pairing dman and does a lot of heavy lifting. Provorov I think gets somewhere around 6.5 per long term
- Just5

My worry is Provy's camp is looking for 7 million or more, otherwise it would of been done and over with for a long time now.

Only options I see are:

3 Year Bridge at 5-5.5m per

or

6-7 years at 6.5m per MAX

Provorov signing is my biggest concern of the offseason because if he seeking Ekblad money or this draws out to camp or beyond then he better have a Norris type season. Otherwise I will be nitpicking every damn thing he does. Last season for him was unacceptable whether he was 18 or 28 years old.

My worry is Provy's camp is looking for 7 million or more, otherwise it would of been done and over with for a long time now.

Only options I see are:

3 Year Bridge at 5-5.5m per

or

6-7 years at 6.5m per MAX

Provorov signing is my biggest concern of the offseason because if he seeking Ekblad money or this draws out to camp or beyond then he better have a Norris type season. Otherwise I will be nitpicking every damn thing he does. Last season for him was unacceptable whether he was 18 or 28 years old.
- Glak18

give provy 7 mil and get it done

My worry is Provy's camp is looking for 7 million or more, otherwise it would of been done and over with for a long time now.

Only options I see are:

3 Year Bridge at 5-5.5m per

or

6-7 years at 6.5m per MAX

Provorov signing is my biggest concern of the offseason because if he seeking Ekblad money or this draws out to camp or beyond then he better have a Norris type season. Otherwise I will be nitpicking every damn thing he does. Last season for him was unacceptable whether he was 18 or 28 years old.
- Glak18

Why Provorov was on ELC and played Nr.1 Dman minutes
No way he will sign for 6m maybe when it is frontloaded with hugh signing bonus

Kakko just scored an absurd goal.
How many years will it take him to score 30 points in the NHL.

Kakko just scored an absurd goal.
How many years will it take him to score 30 points in the NHL.
- PLindbergh31

Probably 39

Kakko just scored an absurd goal.
How many years will it take him to score 30 points in the NHL.
- PLindbergh31

Rangers and devils get he franchise players they need

Why Provorov was on ELC and played Nr.1 Dman minutes
No way he will sign for 6m maybe when it is frontloaded with hugh signing bonus
- goenzoy

Oh that's right Provorov played top pair 20+ mins a game....

You mean like how MacDonald did with the Islanders or Ron Hainsey played 20+ mins on the top pair....Better pay those guys 7 million!

Oh you mean players who play large chunks of minutes, but are good during their shifts so it must be the others who failed. Provorov's play was, not the only reason, but one of the biggest, why the Flyers season was in the toilet last year. I know people want to say how the end of the year he looked better, but realistically it didn't take much to look better then how he played the first 3 quarters of the season. The kid is young and has tons of potential, but the fact is he hasn't proven to be close to a legit number 1 defensemen yet. He struggles immensely on the PP and the PK and spends a lot of his time in his own end during 5on5. His first two years were promising, but only because of his age. If he was 26,27 or 28 years old during his first two years they would be considered ok years for a 2nd pair dman. Now if he wants to be paid like a number 1 defenseman who is proven then he needs to at least prove it first.

It's no different than say Carter Hart. He looked great as a rookie at times, but he hasn't proven anything yet to be called a number 1 goaltender.

Oh that's right Provorov played top pair 20+ mins a game....

You mean like how MacDonald did with the Islanders or Ron Hainsey played 20+ mins on the top pair....Better pay those guys 7 million!

Oh you mean players who play large chunks of minutes, but are good during their shifts so it must be the others who failed. Provorov's play was, not the only reason, but one of the biggest, why the Flyers season was in the toilet last year. I know people want to say how the end of the year he looked better, but realistically it didn't take much to look better then how he played the first 3 quarters of the season. The kid is young and has tons of potential, but the fact is he hasn't proven to be close to a legit number 1 defensemen yet. He struggles immensely on the PP and the PK and spends a lot of his time in his own end during 5on5. His first two years were promising, but only because of his age. If he was 26,27 or 28 years old during his first two years they would be considered ok years for a 2nd pair dman. Now if he wants to be paid like a number 1 defenseman who is proven then he needs to at least prove it first.

It's no different than say Carter Hart. He looked great as a rookie at times, but he hasn't proven anything yet to be called a number 1 goaltender.
- Glak18

I see most of this as being accurate of what happened but it falls short of looking deep enough. There is no doubt in my mind that Provorov's struggles last season were mental and due to an overload of responsibility given too soon to a player of his age, experience and ability. It was only a matter of time. Asking him to correct the team issue of spending too much time defending in their own zone is not reasonable. You're 100% right, he's not a #1 yet but his agent has a lot of ammo to use. I'd play hardball if I'm the Flyers and not give in to an overpayment.

You're taking the same approach you took with SSB on the other thread. You're the one who is being stubborn and not paying attention. I said previously that any play CAN be reviewed. I think it's reasonable to say that every goal scored should be reviewed. I just don't want to see the league evolve into constant stoppages of play for who knows what on any play. We already have off sides reviews for entries that happened a significant time in the past. Where does it end? Where do we draw the line. That is my point if you would get off your high horse and stop worrying about people taking it too far you might learn something.
- MJL

Here's where we draw the line, where there are rules in the NHL rule book, hand passes being one of them, high sticks another, delays of game, those should be able to be reviewed. goalie interference and offsides are, so why not the others?? I dont know what high horse you're referring to, in no way shape or form have I ever alluded to myself being on any type of high horse, im not putting you down, just saying your stubborn, which you are. everyone would agree with that, you know how people think of MJL here, don't take it out on me that Im just pointing out the obvious

If we open up the kinds of plays that can be reviewed then after a team exhausts the number of reviews it can challenge, they were right back to having the potential of the human element making a mistake on a pivotal call.
I think it's rare for refs to have a flawless game. The human element of officiating is part of the game. Not my problem that you don't understand that.

This is your biggest issue. Just because its been part of the game for however long doesn't mean it needs to continue to be to uphold the integrity of the game. These best of 7 series are in place to really show who the better team is over that long of a series, thats why series aren't just one game in Hockey. Refs continue each year to have a bigger say in the game when it comes to mistakes, and that isn't right to the two teams putting it all out there. Disagree about this simple sentiment? Fine, but you're wrong if you do, there's no two ways about it.

And here's an even crazier point, why do you have to stick with something just because it's been the norm for so long? Remember when coke was added to coca cola, that changed. Remember when people didn't know what cigarette's were doing to them, wow, we've changed from that too. Remember when gas was thought of as the only fuel to power cars, now we have electric cause its "cleaner" Your stubborness has shown through time and time again. You say the human element is a part of the game, like its in the rulebook or something. things change, times change, people change. Other than you apparently, you just sit back, throw your hands up, and say well its been part of the game so we can't change it. open your eyes bro.

I see most of this as being accurate of what happened but it falls short of looking deep enough. There is no doubt in my mind that Provorov's struggles last season were mental and due to an overload of responsibility given too soon to a player of his age, experience and ability. It was only a matter of time. Asking him to correct the team issue of spending too much time defending in their own zone is not reasonable. You're 100% right, he's not a #1 yet but his agent has a lot of ammo to use. I'd play hardball if I'm the Flyers and not give in to an overpayment.
- MJL

To me that is the most concerning thing about Provorov, his mental state last year. I doubt we will ever really find out what was going on, but a player does not regress that much in one season without something major going on. Plus the fact one of his major scouting attributes was being mature beyond his years, calm and mentally strong.

I know this is a business and his agent wants to get the best for his client, but if this goes past July 1st without a contract then he is just hurting Provorov more. I know the Flyers used him a lot, but that's what every player wants anyway and if the whole argument is based on that then no way they reach a quick agreement.