I think this is worthy of its own thread. There have been several high profile officiating gaffes this postseason that has put the spotlight on the on ice officiating and the severely flawed replay system the NHL uses. A few examples: 1. The Eakin major penalty in game 7 of Vegas/San Jose that played a significant role in changing the outcome of the series. In this instance the officials panicked at a bad result (Pavelski on the ice with blood coming out of his head). Should they review penalties? 2. Non-reviewable goals. The puck that hit the netting in Columbus and then last night’s debacle in St. Louis where a goal was scored as a result of an obvious hand pass. 3. I’d also lump in the standard of officiating. In my opinion, they are letting a ton of interference, boarding, physical type penalties go (playoff hockey!) but still calling a high volume of the rinky rink taps to the hand. The league has implemented a half in half out approach to review, and we’re seeing the unintended consequences. They don’t want to stop the game and slow down the flow, so the only reviewable plays are offside, GI, puck in or out, and then how the puck directly entered the net (high stick, kick, batted in with a hand). That leaves them in a bad spot when things like the puck hitting the netting and the hand pass happen. You’d think that of the 4 on ice officials, one of them would have an eye on the puck but these have been missed. Goalie interference is a disaster, nobody knows the standard. It seems to be “did the contact affect the goalies ability to make the save?” But judgement comes at the hands of someone in the Toronto war room. Offside reviews is a full on disaster and they have been since it was implemented. They’re taking goals off the board based on a inconsequential margin of a skate being in the air or a hair over the blue line early. This could also happen 30 to 60 seconds before a goal is scored. My other problem is that there is no corrective mechanism for an onside play that gets blown dead. The league has 2 ways to go. They either have to take out review and live with human error, or expand replay. Option 1 is my preferred route, but it doesn’t solve problems like the hand pass. I don’t think they’ll do that. Option 2 is probably where we end up. My idea is to get rid of challenges and go to the NFL model where all scoring plays are reviewed, and everything is on the table in a review. I’d prefer they lay off the offside part, but I feel like it would have to stay on the table to correct a blatant mistake. As far as penalties go, I think I’m OK with them reviewing majors. Those usually pop up when a player is injured. If they want to take a look at what happened while an injured player is being attended to, go for it. The NCAA does this and I think it works for them. Ideas? Thoughts? I’m anti-review, but I don’t think it is going away. They just can’t maintain this status quo and be half-in, half-out.