I think this goes to the evolution of the rule. The offsides rule has worked, with very few exceptions, for years and years. The linesman is making a judgement call based upon a single line relative to a puck and multiple players moving at high rates of speed. With the use of cameras and slow speeds we are bastardizing the spirit of the original rule on technicalities.

Was he offsides? Absolutely...was offsides the reason he scored? Absolutely not. If the NHL is going to use cameras and replays to get calls right, then the rules will need to be adjusted so the spirit of the rule remains intact.

I agree that eventually the "breaking the plain" will be implemented into the rule and this will be rectified. But it doesn't happen overnight.

It could be worse...a team could score a Cup winning goal in overtime which was later seen as a skate in the crea....I mean offsides only for that not to be reversed.
- climbdenali12

I actually made a comment with a pretty similar intent after the Hawks victory & the offside goal controversy. Now that there is the technology to rip every angle apart, there may be a need to adjust the rule to suit the technology. But in saying that, the players know the rule & if they stay within the rule then there is no problem.

How much time would it of taken Drouin to adjust his line & enter a moment later? I doubt by looking at the replay that amount of time would have stopped him scoring??

Then what...how does the linesman call the game?

C'mon...the rules are fine.

Video review is fine.

SOUR GRAPES...you guys are whiners.
- icedog97

I agree.

There is this notion that a skate lifted in the air doesn't make a difference in a goal but the problem is, you cannot prove that. Someone can just as likely argue that a skate in the air did make a difference. In a game where inches and millimeters are the difference between post-and-in or post-and-out, who can say what a skate in the air can affect? Maybe it allowed Drouin that millisecond he needed to get to be in the right position. You can't say for sure one way or the other.

All you can do is follow the letter of the law and the rule in place. All teams are held to those rules, especially the black-and-white ones. Or that is the intention, whether or not that happens is a separate argument.

The point is, that is the rule. The Pens benefited and the Bolts didn't. All the complaining in the world won't change that.

Offsides is there for a reason and, at some point, there has to be a clear distinction from what IS or what ISN'T offsides. And, no matter how that is judged, there will ALWAYS be close calls. This was a close call, that's all. Get over it. Because if they change the rule, there will just be another similar set of circumstance that constitutes a close call and this whole nonsense will start all over again!

I guess you are the type of person who in an argument, jump on a person who uses incorrect gramar. Its a "rule" and the other party made a mistake, but does it really effect the argument?

We had a goal against us challenged and overruled on a similar situation against the Wings and I said the same thing then: The offside rule is there for a very good reason, but the reason is not that an quarter of an inch of a players skate effects the game.
- Cloud

Offside is offside. It doesn't matter by how much.

All im rooting for at this point is Pittsburgh to have a goal disallowed on offsides just to see the reactions with the tables turned.

Anyway if its going to be reviewed there should be a camera on the line...and if they can see they are behind the line its good. the skate is supposed to be on the ice so the linesman can see they are onside, which is probably why the call got missed in the first place

I think this goes to the evolution of the rule. The offsides rule has worked, with very few exceptions, for years and years. The linesman is making a judgement call based upon a single line relative to a puck and multiple players moving at high rates of speed. With the use of cameras and slow speeds we are bastardizing the spirit of the original rule on technicalities.

Was he offsides? Absolutely...was offsides the reason he scored? Absolutely not. If the NHL is going to use cameras and replays to get calls right, then the rules will need to be adjusted so the spirit of the rule remains intact.

I agree that eventually the "breaking the plain" will be implemented into the rule and this will be rectified. But it doesn't happen overnight.

It could be worse...a team could score a Cup winning goal in overtime which was later seen as a skate in the crea....I mean offsides only for that not to be reversed.
- climbdenali12

So in your fantasy world there won't be just as many super close calls, or possibly even more, if they change the rule to "breaking the plane". It makes it infinetely more difficult for the on ice officials which will result in more challenges which will inevitably result in the lesser intelligent fans of the team that "got screwed" crying about it.

And thank you for talking about the spirit of the rule. I didn't realize that you were there when offside was created - long before you were born.

I actually made a comment with a pretty similar intent after the Hawks victory & the offside goal controversy. Now that there is the technology to rip every angle apart, there may be a need to adjust the rule to suit the technology. But in saying that, the players know the rule & if they stay within the rule then there is no problem.

How much time would it of taken Drouin to adjust his line & enter a moment later? I doubt by looking at the replay that amount of time would have stopped him scoring??
- Aussiepenguin

Yeah totally there's so much scoring in the NHL it's great that the league came up with a way to take even more out of it

If you're a person that thinks the offside challenge rule is great, you may be the least fun person on earth, and you probably also enjoy tax audits

Yeah totally there's so much scoring in the NHL it's great that the league came up with a way to take even more out of it

If you're a person that thinks the offside challenge rule is great, you may be the least fun person on earth, and you probably also enjoy tax audits
- mattmoulson

So your argument is that offsides should be ignored because it's fun to ignore rules and it increases scoring? What other rules should we ignore because it is fun and would increase scoring.

You're a moron.

This blog could have been about either the coach's challenge OR the puck-over-glass rule. The fact that firing the puck down the ice and subsequently into the netting over the other goal is "delaying the game" is silly. If they don't eliminate that rule, there should be some discretion over it.

So your argument is that offsides should be ignored because it's fun to ignore rules and it increases scoring? What other rules should we ignore because it is fun and would increase scoring.

You're a moron.
- cheater2

Pretty sure he isn't insinuating that offsides should be ignored all-together, just the instances where you need a micrometer and a camera with a high-res zoom to see if the player was a fraction of an inch early.

I actually made a comment with a pretty similar intent after the Hawks victory & the offside goal controversy. Now that there is the technology to rip every angle apart, there may be a need to adjust the rule to suit the technology. But in saying that, the players know the rule & if they stay within the rule then there is no problem.

How much time would it of taken Drouin to adjust his line & enter a moment later? I doubt by looking at the replay that amount of time would have stopped him scoring??
- Aussiepenguin

This is probably going to be the solution. Some kind of compromise to a coach's challenge and revisiting how offside is interpreted.

Once you go back to the regular season, the blue line cameras probably go away and then you have to deal with quality of camera angles that are different in every building.

And if that's the case, I'm fine with that. I get that its a hard and fast rule. I think the league didn't realize what they were in for when they put this in place and now that it's been tested, I think there's going to need to be some tweaking to the system.

Pretty sure he isn't insinuating that offsides should be ignored all-together, just the instances where you need a micrometer and a camera with a high-res zoom to see if the player was a fraction of an inch early.
- eichiefs9

There HAS TO be a clear delineation between what IS and what ISN'T offsides. That is just how the world works. Sorry.

If it is offsides, then call it. If it isn't offsides then don't call it.

It would be ideal if we knew this information immediately but progress isn't always immediately ideal.

I guess. There is a berth to the Stanley Cup at stake here. And that goal was a pretty big deal. 1st goal of the game. Pens playing from behind in a must-win situation. The Tampa fans losing their minds. That goal could have changed everything.

That said, I think the decision obviously followed the letter of the rule, but not the spirit. Bottom line, to me - Was Drouin behind the blue line? and Did his skate being off the ice (but still on/behind the line) significantly change anything?
- wolfhounds

The way I see it this is one of the few rules in hockey that isn't open to interpretation. It's the gray area in hockey's rule book that has lead to player safety being such a big issue because refs don't call the game the way they should. It's lead to a "spirit of the rule" mentality that fans only think a penalty should be called if a play is agrigious enough.

Personally, I am a fan of when things are called properly. It's better for the game that way and it would lead to a safer league. If you think the rule is dumb, I respect your opinion, because honestly I think it's pretty dumb too, but then change the rules in the rule book concerning offsides so that a floating skate behind the blue line doesn't screw you. This call wasn't at all a technicality, it was called by the book.

My next question is if Ryan Wilson wrote this blog what would everyone that have come to defend the Lightning's reaction have been? My guess is that the general reaction would be similar to the Dubynsky assult blog.

If you are saying the 'spirit of the rule' then you have already missed the point.

The rule is the rule.

Without having any part of his body touching the ice behind the blue line, he is OFFISDE.

The only part of his body on the ice is...

wait for it....

wait for it....

OFFSIDE!!!
- icedog97

Not at all. I respect the rule for what it is and absolutely agree that it was no goal and the correct call was made.

I am past last night's game and looking at the rule as a whole. It was brought up before, why have the linesman if the technology can easily replace it?

I am saying that rules are in place to help better game from a playing and veiwing aspect. And just like the "skate in the crease" rule I don't see how the offsides review betters the game.

I think that if the want to keep the review, most likely, then they should consider adjusting the offsides call.

Offside is offside. It doesn't matter by how much.
- deadpoulet

According to NHL rules he was not offside but he was also not onside. Go read the NHL rule, it's awful because in cases like this he was not offside. The NHL needs to make the rule offside or onside, they can't have both like they do. Not the reason the Lightning lost but to score first could have changed the outcome of the game.

So your argument is that offsides should be ignored because it's fun to ignore rules and it increases scoring? What other rules should we ignore because it is fun and would increase scoring.

You're a moron.
- cheater2

My point is that if a guy is a fraction of an inch offside and a linesman makes a judgement call that he was onside I can live with that.

Ultimately we should probably enforce rules more, the lack of plain as day penalties that aren't called in the playoffs is ridiculous and affects that games wayyyy more than a guy being a fraction of an inch offside.

So we should probably allow coaches to challenge every penalty.

You can say that offside isn't a judgement call but it was until last year and for the most part no one had a problem with it for 50 years

But if you're more comfortable calling me a moron go for it. If you ever park 1 too many inches away from the curb I hope you get a ticket, and then I also hope you're cool with it

So your argument is that offsides should be ignored because it's fun to ignore rules and it increases scoring? What other rules should we ignore because it is fun and would increase scoring.

You're a moron.
- cheater2

They don't have an argument.

Yeah totally there's so much scoring in the NHL it's great that the league came up with a way to take even more out of it

If you're a person that thinks the offside challenge rule is great, you may be the least fun person on earth, and you probably also enjoy tax audits
- mattmoulson

I'm just saying that a goal was challenged as it could be & was found to be offside. Everything was within the rules. The Bolts blogger has now blown up (didn't hear boo from him as I've said a few weeks ago - Hawks Blues......), about a rule that's been in place for donkeys years.

There were 7 goals scored - I'd call that a high scoring playoffs game wouldn't you?

There are other ways to increase scoring that don't change any existing rules & wouldn't need a referendum for change, so not sure what your issue is with the rule??

Why anybody thinks changing the rule to "breaking the plane" instead a foot on the ice would result in less close calls or challenges makes no sense to me. It will probably result in more.

Fine, if that half-inch of a skate off the ice is the problem, then you're not allowed to have any part of your body over the line before the puck. So no more straddling the freaking line. Otherwise, if you can be over the line before the puck (which is what you are by not being actively on the ice behind the line), then what's the point of even having a blue line? What's the point of having offsides at all? 1 big 200 foot zone!

It's a game of inches, and you're arguing that those inches don't matter. You're wrong. They do. That same amount of distance is all that's needed between a shot that clangs off the post and shoots out to the corner & one that goes crossbar down. Those inches matter. Period.

My point is that if a guy is a fraction of an inch offside and a linesman makes a judgement call that he was onside I can live with that.

Ultimately we should probably enforce rules more, the lack of plain as day penalties that aren't called in the playoffs is ridiculous and affects that games wayyyy more than a guy being a fraction of an inch offside.

So we should probably allow coaches to challenge every penalty.

You can say that offside isn't a judgement call but it was until last year and for the most part no one had a problem with it for 50 years

But if you're more comfortable calling me a moron go for it. If you ever park 1 too many inches away from the curb I hope you get a ticket, and then I also hope you're cool with it
- mattmoulson

Again - bad argument.

"It was done this way in the past, so we should never try to improve it."

Murder is also a judgment call, at least conviction of it is, does that mean we should not try to advance our prosecution of it?

This blog could have been about either the coach's challenge OR the puck-over-glass rule. The fact that firing the puck down the ice and subsequently into the netting over the other goal is "delaying the game" is silly. If they don't eliminate that rule, there should be some discretion over it.
- eichiefs9

What should it be changed to? The only thing else it could be is an icing on the PK unit. Anything else would be farce as the PK unit could just launch pucks up into the air sky high in order to get an offensive zone faceoff or a painless shift change.

So in your fantasy world there won't be just as many super close calls, or possibly even more, if they change the rule to "breaking the plane". It makes it infinetely more difficult for the on ice officials which will result in more challenges which will inevitably result in the lesser intelligent fans of the team that "got screwed" crying about it.

And thank you for talking about the spirit of the rule. I didn't realize that you were there when offside was created - long before you were born.
- Njuice

I am sorry. I just saw your fandom...i humbly ask forgiveness.

The rule is the rule.

What if Drouin had accepted a pass like that then shot on goal and it goes in?

Then what, it should be offside...but because in this case he wasn't involved with the puck at the line it shouldn't be?

NOPE.

You accept the 'fair' rule and you live with it.

Drouin knows the rule...you drag your skate to stay onside...that's what players do all the time.

Why anybody thinks changing the rule to "breaking the plane" instead a foot on the ice would result in less close calls or challenges makes no sense to me. It will probably result in more.
- Njuice

Also might open the door to arms length leads into the offensive zone.

Pretty sure he isn't insinuating that offsides should be ignored all-together, just the instances where you need a micrometer and a camera with a high-res zoom to see if the player was a fraction of an inch early.
- eichiefs9

?? Lots & lots of pixels & a magnified glass???