NHL, General Manager discuss video reviews on the 1st day of meetings

Manalapan, Florida – The NHL used the first day of its annual meetings with General Managers Monday to review his own work with the GMS-specific for the video review of the trainer and continue to clarify them about the decision-making process.

“This was pedagogically and checked our compass for the video check and all aspects of it,” said Kris King, the Executive Vice President of the NHL hockey operations. “These boys understand that they are difficult and understand that they are not all the same. They have opinions about those who describe them in their games, but the part of it was important. This was an indication of where we are, because we know that we have some big games.”

For the first time, the NHL implemented the coach's challenge in the 2015/16 season for challenging goals that achieved potential offside and goalkeeper interference violations. Since then, the league has added the opportunity to question goals, achieved a missed interruption in the game and the delay in the game for a puck that was shot out of the game.

In 2019-20, the league added a minor punishment for the challenge of a failed trainer, which led to a sharp decline in the number of challenges and the cancellation of the goals.

On Monday, the NHL wanted to get an advertisement from the GMS about how they believe that the process works and whether they do not agree with anything or want to see some changes or significant changes.

So the GMS saw all the same videos in their Breakout meetings and were asked to be a goal or no goal based on the challenge of the specific trainer. Your findings will be brought to the big group meeting on Tuesday.

“We gave them all of these videos and asked them what they thought, and if we can see something, we will do it, but I know that we are in a really good place,” said King.

It is not surprising that the video check for goals for potential goalkeeper interventions will receive the greatest discussion in the meeting on Tuesday. These are the most subjective calls.

In order to ensure clarity, the league in a presentation in front of the media that corresponds to the presentation, in a presentation that contained the GMS it contained, gave guidelines on the process that it goes through in the NHL situational room in order to determine the goal or no goal for the ratings of goalkeeper interferences.

If there is contact with the goalkeeper, was it deliberate or accidental?

Has the player contact the goalkeeper in the blue color or white color when it happened? A player can go into the wrinkle as long as he lets the goalkeeper play his position.

Has the skater started contact or was it the goalkeeper? Was there an action from a defensive player or an offensive player who led to contact? Does the goalkeeper have the chance to reset to make the rescue?

“We are constantly using this meeting to educate our managers and ask them questions,” said Colin Campbell, Senior Executive Vice President of Hockey Operations, NHL. “They are a good group of hockey people who come for different backgrounds, and we have a good feeling about how they feel in this aspect of the game.

“So are we too careful when protecting goalkeepers?

For consistency purposes, every video review process and every decision is directed by some or all vice presidents of Campbell, King and Group, Rod Pasma and Kay Whitmore.

“It is a very complicated rule and if you take the time to go through what distinguishes a piece from another, it is surprisingly consistent,” said Carolina Hurricanes GM Eric Tulsky. “I know that it can be difficult to see from your couch at home if you have not spent time to go through all the different pieces and all different nuances that separate a game from another, but for the work that you have for a decision to make, I think it is extraordinary how high the consistency you have.”

The number of challenges for the interference of goalkeepers has increased this season compared to the previous three. When he entered on Monday, there were 108 reviews for the interference of goalkeeper with 62, which led to fallen goals. Last season there were 88 reviews and 48 fallen destinations. In 2022-23 it was 85 with 42 overturned and 82 with 35 overturned 2021-22.

The NHL believes that the increase in the ratings of goalkeeper interferences is a result of parity in the league and how close games are played. 75 percent are decided with one or two goals with a gate with an empty network, from an average of five seasons of 70 percent compared to 2019 to 2014.

“At the moment, the boys go online as hard,” said Whitmore. “I think they climb in there and don't worry about it because they just try to score and win. They don't try to disturb the goalkeeper, but sometimes they lose where they are on the ice. That could be another reason why there are more challenges – because there is only more goalkeeper mixture.”