Quote:
Originally Posted by Manny A
Other than reviewing whether or not a goal was scored, what else do they review in the NHL? I'm willing to bet it's not that extensive a list.
Of course, my experience is based solely upon the occasional Caps game that I watch on local TV. But do they review calls of offsides, icing, catching-n-carrying the puck illegally, high-sticking, and other calls that do not necessarily result in penalties? Nope.
Yeah, they do have some sort of control room that reviews plays, and that's what MLB plans on using next season (if the expanded replay proposal passes muster). But the focus of the NHL system is on the goal, and not much else. So how is that system better than the NFLs and MLBs? Seems to me more mistakes are unreviewable in hockey than in other sports.
|
Some things about the NFL system don't make sense to me. Why automatically review some things and not others? Why are field goals, fumble recoveries, etc not reviewable? There's either evidence to overturn or there's not.
Part of my issue with automatically reviewing all turnovers is that it seems like in some situations they keep a play live to see how it plays out figuring they can fix it on replay later, but that call (in reality a non-call) becomes the call that you need 100% evidence to overturn.
That's exactly what I don't want to see in baseball. I want umpires calling it the way they see it. Not calling any borderline call fair.