The ref, LaRue, told Totonto that he intended to blow the play dead. Even though LaRue intended to blow the play dead after the puck crossed the goal line, and actually blew the whistle several seconds after, he didn't know just how bad his call was. He never saw a replay until after the game, or maybe on the scoreboard, but in any event he told Toronto that he intended the play to be dead. Once Toronto hears that the ref intended the play dead, no matter how late the whistle was, Toronto is out of the equation and never reviews the play.
The ref has it hard enough, don't get wrong - it was a bad call and I ABSOLUTELY HATE quick whistles. Nobody in Toronto with the video review could do anything about it though, so it wasn't their fault. The real fault lies with a messed up review procedure. The rules need changing so that refs allow a play to finish before blowing it dead (or even intending to blow it dead). The review process should be allowed to carry on regardless of what the ref did.
Last but not least, there should be some fairly simple technology put in place to allow an easy view of goal/no goal scenarios. A clear or semi-clear modified surface in the goal cage with a camera under the surface would allow an unobstructed view of almost every scenario possible. A very thin sheet of ice supported by plexi glass with a camera set underneath and angled toward the goal line would cost the same as the camera set on the back post of the cage, but be able to see any puck on ice level and exactly where it is compared to the goal line. Pads, sticks, and gloves could never obstuct the view of the puck at ice level from underneath. The vast majority of goal/no goal scenarios are with the puck at ice level, and the ice inside the cage is pretty much never used or skated on, so it would seem to be an easy solution.
|
Where the hell is the Donald when we need him 
