Very fluky goal in LAK vs DET game.

[Mike Brown]

There actually is a rule in the rulebook that says play can still continue if the puck hits the safety netting and goes undetected by the officials.  I kid you not.

[squishyx]

There actually is a rule in the rulebook that says play can still continue if the puck hits the safety netting and goes undetected by the officials.  I kid you not.

Yep.

 

85.1

 

Should the puck strike the spectator netting at the ends and the corners of the arena, play shall be stopped and the ensuing face-off shall be determined as if the puck went outside the playing area. However, if the puck striking the spectator netting goes unnoticed by the on-ice officials, play shall continue as normal and resulting play with the puck shall be deemed a legitimate play. Players must not stop playing the game until they hear the whistle to do so.

 

But i think the spirit of that rule is about continuing direct play after it occurs. It would be one thing if a Detroit player picks up the puck and shoots it in, it's another for it to get in directly off the net. Consider for example that a goal that goes off an official directly is disallowed, the wording is just an oversight, they probably never even considered this. As such there should be some umbrella rule that gives the war room in Toronto the power to overturn egregious calls.

[NJDevs4978]

Yeah well look at how much more difficult a job it is to officiate hockey compared to football and baseball.

I am on board with a coach's challenge system as well as letting the officials review a play whenever they feel like they need to double-check something.  Also, I don't understand why we need video goal judges and calls to Toronto.  Just let the ref or linesman himself take a look at the replay in the scorer's box.

 

Football's a lot more difficult to ref imo with their 925746 different rules and 6 officials for 22 players on a bigger field as opposed to two refs and two linesmen for 10 players on the ice.

Edited January 20, 2014 by NJDevs4978

[Devils Dose]

Football's a lot more difficult to ref imo with their 925746 different rules and 6 officials for 22 players on a bigger field as opposed to two refs and two linesmen for 10 players on the ice.

Well in the NFL and NCAA they have 7 officials, which is actually a very good number on pass plays as you have two watching blocking/QB and one watching each eligible receiver.  Special teams plays are challenging though.

 

I think ice hockey officiating is tougher though.  The most critical part of officiating is positioning.  It is hard to see something the wrong way if you have a good angle and distance from the action.  But even if you have been on skates since age 3, you cannot change your position with the play as quickly on ice as you can on your feet.  Not to mention that hockey officials are pretty much the only ones putting their lives on the line while they work (maybe home plate umpires as well).

[devilsfan26]

It doesn't work that well in football either....in fact the NFL is looking towards the NHL's "War Room" model to set up replays in the same style

I don't get to watch many NFL games, but in my not-so-expert opinion, I feel like football's problem is that some of the rules are too vague, like for example what exactly is considered a catch and what they mean by "football move."

 

Football's a lot more difficult to ref imo with their 925746 different rules and 6 officials for 22 players on a bigger field as opposed to two refs and two linesmen for 10 players on the ice.

It is a higher player to official ratio and the field is bigger, but it is much more structured than hockey and things don't happen as quickly as they do on the ice.  Plus since the field is wider, the officials on the sidelines can be further from the play and have a wider view.  When you're in the middle of the action it's much harder to see everything.  That's why things that seem obvious to people in the stands may go uncalled by the officials on the ice.