Tciso wrote:On really bad calls, the refs should huddle like they do in the CFL, and say "on review, there was no penalty on the play". That alone would make the calls better.
Problem with that is that in the CFL and NFL the flag is thrown, the play continues, and if, after the officials conference, it is deemed that there is no penalty on the play, then the next play is started where the last play ended.
In hockey how does that work? One official holds up his arm indicating a delayed penalty. The goaltender goes to the bench and the extra attacker comes out. Now it's a man advantage until the soon to be penalized team touches the puck. If the attacking team scores on the play and it is ruled there should have been no penalty then what do they do? Call it back? Well how can they, the attacking team did nothing wrong, they are entitled to have 6 men on the ice, the goaltender being out for the extra attacker is a legal play at any point during the game. However, no coach, and no goaltender, are going to make that call in the middle of a game unless they know that the other team cannot score because as soon as they touch the puck the play is dead. The defending team doesn't have a leg to stand on in this case because they were defending just the same as they would have in either situation. With a pending call coming their way they may even have gotten away with being a bit more aggressive.....
So they now waive off a completely good goal because they indicated a penalty, that they were going to call back, but is now nullified by the goal anyhow?
The referee huddle/conference is a system that can't work effectively in a game that doesn't stop and go play to play like football.
That being said, I do think that one official should be able to overrule the other official with the final say going to the referee who was closest to the play and had the best view on the call. It would mean some of these NHL refs putting their egos on the shelf in favor of getting the correct call made on the ice and bettering the game.