You're putting the judgement on the refs which is a terrible idea. The rule is as long as your skates are on the ice, and at least touching part of the blue line, you're onside. Doesn't matter, and shouldn't matter, where the rest of your body is in relation to the blue line.
- mw630

No I agree, I was just using that example to point out the absurdity of changing a very simple and clear rule. Drouin knows the rule and should've kept his foot down, and PITT did the right thing challenging as it likely saved their season

Slow the game down and get the right call... orrrrr get the wrong call and "keep the game going fast"

hmm... well.. this is a difficult one...
- j.boyd919

You're never going to get 100% of the calls right, never. Why slow the game down at all to get one call right? Each team has one challenge so maybe in a game the refs get 2 calls they would have got wrong, right, but then they miss 2 other calls. Is the game a better game because we waited for 5 minutes for the refs to look at tiny ipads? As a fan I don't want to sit around and wait, I want to see hockey. Every team will have calls go for them or against, in a season it will balance out so let them play and let the human element stay.

I get your point on those and I think there should be some that can be challenged. I think some penalties would be tough to overturn, ones us fans would call "weak" and are done at discretion of the officials (not black/white), but if they can find a way to get all calls right, I would support that
- WhiteLie

I'd be in favour of having a few more refs who simply watch the game from off the ice and can radio into the on ice officials when they see a call. I mean if we the fans and the commentators can catch these missed calls seconds after they happen, why not have a ref that watches the cameras and can tell the on ice officials to make a call.

You're never going to get 100% of the calls right, never. Why slow the game down at all to get one call right? Each team has one challenge so maybe in a game the refs get 2 calls they would have got wrong, right, but then they miss 2 other calls. Is the game a better game because we waited for 5 minutes for the refs to look at tiny ipads? As a fan I don't want to sit around and wait, I want to see hockey. Every team will have calls go for them or against, in a season it will balance out so let them play and let the human element stay.
- Kucherovski

Yes. Yes it is.

I'd be in favour of having a few more refs who simply watch the game from off the ice and can radio into the on ice officials when they see a call. I mean if we the fans and the commentators can catch these missed calls seconds after they happen, why not have a ref that watches the cameras and can tell the on ice officials to make a call.
- lemieux_66

Agreed. With how close the cameras are, the angles they are at and how fast we can produce these replays, I would rather a slight delay in the arm going up from radioing the on ice official and get the call right, than missing them all together

Yes. Yes it is.
- j.boyd919

Agree to disagree, I like to let the players play. The refs are not 100% perfect and I don't expect them to be, either do the players so let them play and as a fan don't make me sit around and wait.

Seriously, (frank) the bolts now. all because of you dense ass fans. go pens.

Seriously, (frank) the bolts now. all because of you dense ass fans. go pens.
- Blackstrom2

This guy.

He was, by the letter of the rule, offside.

When something like this is ruled offside, it's a bad rule.

He was, by the letter of the rule, offside.

When something like this is ruled offside, it's a bad rule.


- wolfhounds

Just curious, but do you play?

Just curious, but do you play?
- Blackstrom2

Ice hockey? No. Street and roller back in the day, no team sports now.

Does that change the fact that most of Drouin's body is on the blueline/in the neutral zone?

He was, by the letter of the rule, offside.

When something like this is ruled offside, it's a bad rule.


- wolfhounds

Do you REALLY want it to be the ref's discretion whether a player's skate that is off the ice is above/behind the blue line and not in the zone? What happens when the skate is off the ice and it's much closer to being completely over the blue line? Having the rule be black and white, much like the shooting the puck over the glass, is the best way to handle it. Otherwise you might as well eliminate offsides all together because no one will be able to stomach the conspiracy theories that will inevitably come when a call goes against their team.

If the linesman blew it offside, then we wouldn't even be having this discussion. They have to make a judgment somewhere in the rulebook and since they made offside or onside a reviewable offense, stuff like this was bound to happen. It's one thing to argue that offsides shouldn't be reviewable, it's another thing to say it's a bad rule as it's written in the book...Uh...if it was called as it was written in the book, the play would have been whistled dead and no one would be talking about this.

Ice hockey? No. Street and roller back in the day, no team sports now.

Does that change the fact that most of Drouin's body is on the blueline/in the neutral zone?
- wolfhounds

it helps one understand why someone would make the line of reasoning that you're trying to make.

What are you arguing? That you think that there should be ref's discretion on offsides? Like, oh well the player didn't have an obvious advantage, so the ref should disregard the fact that the player was a quarter inch, or 4 inches or 1 inch or 1 foot, offside?

He was, by the letter of the rule, offside.

When something like this is ruled offside, it's a bad rule.


- wolfhounds

I'll say it again: is it the league/rule's fault or is it the player for not knowing/following? I understand it sucks but this is the top league in the world and things come down to the details. Every hockey league, tournament and organization acknowledges and follows this as offside and no one has a problem with it being called that way

I'll say it again: is it the league/rule's fault or is it the player for not knowing/following? I understand it sucks but this is the top league in the world and things come down to the details. Every hockey league, tournament and organization acknowledges and follows this as offside and no one has a problem with it being called that way
- WhiteLie

it's called offside because it is offside. They are upset because they don't see it as being any sort of advantage for the team on the rush, but that's not how it works. If Droiun doesn't score, no one would be be trying to make this bizarre argument that offside should be referee's discretion now.

If you don't like the review on offside/onside plays, that's one thing. It's entirely different when they are trying to argue ref's discretion.

it helps one understand why someone would make the line of reasoning that you're trying to make.

What are you arguing? That you think that there should be ref's discretion on offsides? Like, oh well the player didn't have an obvious advantage, so the ref should disregard the fact that the player was a quarter inch, or 4 inches or 1 inch or 1 foot, offside?
- Blackstrom2

I guess it depends on the point of the offside rule. What do you think the point is?

I guess it depends on the point of the offside rule. What do you think the point is?
- wolfhounds

You know what sport has an objectively written rule on offsides, yet is constantly under criticism for blown calls because they don't have a black and white judgement call or a permanent line?

Offside is offside, and if the linesman blew it dead like he should have, you wouldn't be on this crusade right now. But because Droiun happened to score, all of a sudden, the rules of offside/onside must be entirely reinterpreted? Like, okay, he scored, so I guess it's okay that he was a little offside since it seemingly gave the rush team no advantage?

it's called offside because it is offside. They are upset because they don't see it as being any sort of advantage for the team on the rush, but that's not how it works. If Droiun doesn't score, no one would be be trying to make this bizarre argument that offside should be referee's discretion now.

If you don't like the review on offside/onside plays, that's one thing. It's entirely different when they are trying to argue ref's discretion.
- Blackstrom2

I'm not arguing that. I'm saying it makes no sense to call a player 'offside' when the majority of his body is not in fact past the blue line. Only by some serious mental acrobats is an individual offside (gaining an advantage by entering the zone ahead of the puck) when most of his body is not beyond the blue line but his trailing skate is off the ice.

It makes more sense, at least to me, to extend the blue line straight up on the z-plane.

You know what sport has an objectively written rule on offsides, yet is constantly under criticism for blown calls because they don't have a black and white judgement call or a permanent line?

Offside is offside, and if the linesman blew it dead like he should have, you wouldn't be on this crusade right now. But because Droiun happened to score, all of a sudden, the rules of offside/onside must be entirely reinterpreted? Like, okay, he scored, so I guess it's okay that he was a little offside since it seemingly gave the rush team no advantage?
- Blackstrom2

You didn't answer the question.

I'll say it again: is it the league/rule's fault or is it the player for not knowing/following? I understand it sucks but this is the top league in the world and things come down to the details. Every hockey league, tournament and organization acknowledges and follows this as offside and no one has a problem with it being called that way
- WhiteLie

He was offside. Not arguing it. I just don't think the fact that most of his body was not in the offensive zone but his skate was up therefore he's offside makes a lot of sense.

I'm not arguing that. I'm saying it makes no sense to call a player 'offside' when the majority of his body is not in fact past the blue line. Only by some serious mental acrobats is an individual offside (gaining an advantage by entering the zone ahead of the puck) when most of his body is not beyond the blue line but his trailing skate is off the ice.

It makes more sense, at least to me, to extend the blue line straight up on the z-plane.
- wolfhounds

By the letter of the rule, the majority of the body CAN be over the line as long as the steel of the skate is still touching blue. Guys legally enter the zone that way by dragging their legs on rushes, should they then be offside because the majority of their bodies are in the zone before the puck?

I'm not arguing that. I'm saying it makes no sense to call a player 'offside' when the majority of his body is not in fact past the blue line. Only by some serious mental acrobats is an individual offside (gaining an advantage by entering the zone ahead of the puck) when most of his body is not beyond the blue line but his trailing skate is off the ice.

It makes more sense, at least to me, to extend the blue line straight up on the z-plane.
- wolfhounds

What constitutes "the majority of his body"? Where do you draw the line? You are making it a ref's discretion vs making a black and white rule. What might be considered the majority of the body to one ref will certainly not be the exact same to another. So you're just asking for inconsistent calls, which is worse than having a rule you disagree with being called consistently throughout the league.

I'm not arguing that. I'm saying it makes no sense to call a player 'offside' when the majority of his body is not in fact past the blue line. Only by some serious mental acrobats is an individual offside (gaining an advantage by entering the zone ahead of the puck) when most of his body is not beyond the blue line but his trailing skate is off the ice.

It makes more sense, at least to me, to extend the blue line straight up on the z-plane.
- wolfhounds

it makes perfect sense, and if you played ice hockey, you would understand how even a quarter of a step advantage is all it takes to blow by a defender. It also has to do with momentum, and most importantly, which foot he is able to stride with first when entering the zone. If he entered the zone with his back foot in the ice, he needs more time to make the next stride with his front foot. If he entered the zone with his front foot, illegally, he is able to not waste any time on his next stride.

it makes perfect sense, and if you played ice hockey, you would understand how even a quarter of a step advantage is all it takes to blow by a defender. It also has to do with momentum, and most importantly, which foot he is able to stride with first when entering the zone. If he entered the zone with his back foot in the ice, he needs more time to make the next stride with his front foot. If he entered the zone with his front foot, illegally, he is able to not waste any time on his next stride.
- Blackstrom2

I was thinking the same thing, for Drouin to be onside he likely wouldve been half a step behind from where he got the puck after coming to a near stop. In this situation it probably wouldnt have made a difference in the result, as he probably wouldve still got to the puck and the net still been fairly empty but thats asking a lot for a linesman to predict the future impact of a discretionary offside call...