It can vary widely depending on what is available and where the game is played. Some teams may have more access to it at home games for example where they have more control, and depending on how the game is broadcast. I think every league now has replay and most if not all D1 teams have Internet video broadcasts even if the game is not on broadcast TV, but the angles and replays available may vary depending on all of that, as well as how quickly a replay from a good angle may be able to be seen. I don’t know what is available in Buffalo this weekend for instance. I’d think that the TV replays may be available, but again it’s hard to tell and there you’d be at the mercy of the broadcast, what it shows and when it is able to show a useful replay. By the time you have to make a decision you may not have had a chance to have someone look at a replay of an angle that gives you a definitive answer as to what happened on the play — and you also have to take your best guess as to how the officials will rule on the play. I’ve also seen that often the assistant coach watching from upstairs and communicating with the bench for the first two periods comes down and is on the bench for the remainder of the game. Some teams may still have someone up there for the purpose of being able to look at replays and also to watch from above, but not always. In short we just don’t always know and it isn’t always consistent. > On Apr 12, 2019, at 8:47 PM, Carol White <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > > Well I know that the Gophers usually had one assistant coach upstairs watching and he was in communication with the other coach on the bench - not sure if the NC$$ allows that at their games. > > Carol > > Sent from my iPod > > On Apr 12, 2019, at 7:24 PM, Mark Lewin <[log in to unmask] <mailto:[log in to unmask]>> wrote: > >> I (as well as others) am making an assumption that the coaches have staff who are upstairs watching the game and who have access to video for situations like this. This is the way it is in the NFL and NHL but does anyone know that this is the case in college hockey. I'm sure video recording is taking place but the technology to record, re queue and instantly review plays takes fairly sophisticated technology. As Mike mentioned, even the referees cannot make the system work at times. Does anyone know what kind of review system a coach has at his disposal in real time? >> >> >> On Fri, Apr 12, 2019 at 6:55 PM Mike Machnik <[log in to unmask] <mailto:[log in to unmask]>> wrote: >> Right — and one other key component of the decision that has to be made: if you decide to challenge and ask for a video review, and you lose the challenge, you lose your timeout. With 3:10 left in a 3-3 game, you run the risk, for example, of not having your timeout available to use if your team ices the puck. That could cost you the game. Of course, if you win the challenge, you have a golden opportunity to win the game. Tough decision to make, but one where I think you have to be very sure you’re going to win it, including that it has to be ruled a major and ejection for the offending player by the rules. As mentioned under the current rules, even if the review results in a determination that it was a penalty but didn’t quite rise to that level, no penalty at all is called and you still lose the challenge and timeout. >> >> What we don’t know is what information the DU staff had available to it at the time they had to decide. But with the experience they have on that staff — including two former head coaches as assistants, and both Carle and MacMillan having been assistants on the 2017 NCAA Championship team — I just don’t think a lack of experience or the fact that Carle is in his first year as head coach was a factor. I think they made the best decision they could with what they knew at that time, one that even a longtime head coach may have made. >> >> And I would reiterate that what Denver did in that game yesterday without Pettersen was just remarkable. I didn’t give them much chance knowing he was out. Even Carvel commented after the game on the great game plan that Denver had. I don’t think you come up with that plan and coach the way you do during that game as a staff and then suddenly make a blunder like this. To me it wasn’t a blunder. In hindsight it certainly looks like they should have called for the challenge, but there’s so much that can go into a decision like this that it’s hard for me to question it. >> >> I do think that what we saw just in the games yesterday, not to mention throughout the season, indicates there is still work to be done to refine the replay/review system. It should not have to come down to a coach having to make a decision like this in a game of this magnitude. IMO, the purpose of replay is to avoid the egregious mistakes that may sometimes occur as a result of officials simply being human. It should augment the work they do down on the ice. To that end, I’d like to see an official in the booth who has the power to call down and say, hey guys, here’s a play you should take a look at. It’s not going to be possible to do this every game nor do I think it should, but it could be done at least in conference semifinals and championships, as well as the NCAA tournament. >> >> And in support of that, it just doesn’t look good for the game on this stage to have things like this happen. On the DU side, you have a play where they almost certainly should have received a major power play and had that opportunity to win the game. On the UMass side, you have a player who went to practice today getting ready to play in the NCAA championship game and was told he won’t be playing. If the call had been made at that time, it probably would have resulted in a major and game misconduct, and while he would have been out the rest of that game, he probably would have been able to come back tomorrow night — although we don’t know that of course, because the supplemental discipline could have still been handed down. But maybe not. >> >> We have the technology. We just have to use it right. >> >> Along the same lines, I wanted to touch on the fact that often it seems like video review is taking an extraordinarily long time — with the very valid thought that if it isn’t that clear to make a quick decision to change the call on the ice, then that should tell you the call should stand. But many times it is actually the case that they’re having trouble getting the system to work and show them the replays and angles they want to see. I can’t tell you how many times I’ve learned after a game that that happened. That means there is still work to be done to improve the system and access to what they need to see. We’re still relatively early in the era of video review, with the inevitable growing pains — I think we’ll see further refinement to the entire process in the near future. >> >> - mike >> >>>>> >>> >> >> >> <https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail&utm_term=icon> Virus-free. www.avast.com <https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail&utm_term=link> <x-msg://38/#DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>