Adam Proteau: Thanks, but no thanks, to expanded video replay in future NHL seasons This is the first season the NHL is using a coach's challenge to extend the use of video replay. And now that half of the season is over, it's clear the league was right to be hesitant to use it in all situations. You don't want to not embrace technology, but as major league baseball is showing, you can embrace it too much, and the NHL must be careful in future years not to lean on video replay.

it would be interesting to see if an unsuccessful coaches challenge was then punished by a delay of game penalty. I wonder if that would keep the number of challenges down.

Another great blog Adam.
I'm really enjoying your point(s) of view and your work here.
I'd really enjoy the site a hell of a lot more if you were given your own space up in the top right corner.
You'd probably do really well and the credibility factor would instantly improve in a massive way...that is definitely what's needed there!
Anyway...well done!

As a fan, I am annoyed that the replay system seems more like a waste of time and doesn't really address the core issues that affect the game.

1. Offsides replay on goals. Should be limited to 15 seconds or so after the puck crosses the blue line. Offsides is meant to avoid an advantage situation for the offensive team. Really, after 10 seconds and a couple of passes, everyone should be in position. The temporary advantage of the offsides is lost after that. However, it seems that these are challenged after much longer periods in the offensive zone, particularly in the OT. It's frustrating to find goals wiped out and a minute of game time goes to naught because the clock doesn't re-set to the time when the offsides occurred.

2. Goals. Best point of replay should be to determine if the puck crossed the line. It's worth it to get it right. On the other hand, we see way too many games stopped because officials lost sight of pucks in play -- when I can see the puck from the top of the 300 level. This call is way too inconsistent. Reviewing can't help when the action is called to a halt and potential goals never get a chance to materialize. (Then the league worries about why more goals aren't being scored.)

3. Penalties. What's more frustrating than watching Jaromir Jagr or other top players get high sticked, lose 4 teeth, leave a pool of blood all over the ice, stop the game for 5 minutes, and not have a penalty called? Everyone in the stadium saw it live and then 5 more times on the jumbo screen directly over the rink. Yet, these obvious ones are not subject to review? Or, players are injured on no calls, and then the NHL issues a 3-day suspension. It seems like there is some room for fixing here.