I never thought I’d find myself in the corner where I would rather watch a sporting event and despise the notion of checking with the instant replay camera to make sure the correct call was made, but I’ve come full circle on this issue.
As the NHL playoffs began last week, the St. Louis Blues ended up losing game two of their first round series against Chicago, in no small part, because they got royally hooped because of video replay. Late in the third period, they appeared to score a crucial go ahead goal, but just as the puck was about to be dropped at centre ice, the Blackhawks issued a challenge to see if the puck carrier was offside. After an incredible delay, yes, the officials decided the Blues’ player had his skate in the air as the puck crossed the blue line and, by about an inch or so, it was offside. Therefore, the goal did not count. Moments later, Chicago scores the go ahead goal by crashing the net. St. Louis issues a challenge to see if they can get a goalie interference ruling and they lose. The goal stands and the Blackhawks go on to victory.
Now, many of you will wonder why I’d be so upset about video replay if the correct call was, eventually, made. You have an excellent point, but the spirit of video replay is to prevent glaring human errors from deciding the outcome of games. It’s not meant for coaches to find loopholes to get goals disallowed. I’m wondering why, if we are going to call offside to the millimetre, penalties can’t be challenged. We have all watched hockey games where the referees put their whistle in the pocket in the third period to minimize their impact on the outcome. To me, if you are going to say ‘hey, offside is offside and it doesn’t matter how close it is’, then how come we can’t say the same about a cross check, trip, hook, or slash? You may say because those penalties require ones judgement and are not clear cut black and white. I beg to differ if you look at the rule book. Besides, isn’t goalie interference a judgement call too and that one is allowed to be reviewed? It’s the slippery slope that has been started and I don’t think you can stop. My solution to all of this would be to ban the coach challenges altogether (in every sport, not just hockey) and allow an independent eye in the sky to review all scoring plays and any other play that he notices at live speed (the same as an official on the playing surface). The offside against St. Louis was a last ditch effort by the Hawks. It should be noted that as the Blues crossed the line, nobody stopped trying and the goal that was scored was not due to a blatant rule break.
I was hoping for two challenges on the same play of the Boston Red Sox-Toronto Blue Jays game on Saturday. The Red Sox were turning a double play and Dustin Pedroia did not touch second base at all, meaning the Blue Jay runner should be safe (by the letter of the law, even though he was out by a mile). The Jays’ runner slid aggressively into second, disrupting Pedroia’s throw, and we’ve seen these types of actions challenged and the double play awarded in the past. What would have happened if Toronto challenged Pedroia being off the bag and Boston challenged the slide as being illegal? They both could have won. What happens? The bottom line is that challenges slow down the game (in every sport) a great deal and they are, seldom, a result of an egregious miss by the official; but rather a self serving play to exploit the fine print of the rules.
When it comes to making sports more entertaining and instituting change, coaches should never be involved. Their job is not to make it more fun, but rather to win. In hockey, coaches are notorious for eliminating scoring chances and the rule changes that get introduced are never designed to open the game up. Everyone has an agenda and in the NHL, this is a problem because you, increasingly, have a number of former players assuming roles in management and they, too, relate much better to competition than they do to making the game more enjoyable for the viewer. I think this is why the NFL gets it right more often than not when they decide to make rule changes. The majority of the people in charge are suit and tie guys who never played the game at a high level (John Elway aside) and understand business.
Speaking of business, I wonder if Rogers will continue their mega deal with the NHL next year and continue to keep Ron MacLean on the sidelines. It’s clear their sagging ratings would get a boost from MacLean returning to a prominent host position on Hockey Night In Canada. It’s also clear they are bleeding money as they are resorting to broadcast in the American feeds on a number of the first round playoff series. Can’t say I feel sorry for them.
Nice person mentions this week to Shayne Tait, Nicole Campbell, Kristy Helbren, Steve Sutton, and Kevin Lee.
