Regel 37: Video Review

...

When a video review is initiated, one of the Referees (On-ice Officials) will make an announcement that “the play is under review.”

Should the first stoppage of play following an apparent goal coincide with the end of a period, the On-ice Official(s) will instruct both Teams to remain at their respective Players’ Bench until the Video Review of the play can be completed.

If the review reveals that the goal should be counted, the clock (including penalty time clocks, if applicable) shall be reset to the time the goal was scored.

If the review reveals that no goal was scored, no adjustment to the time clock(s) will be made.

Only one goal can be awarded at any stoppage of play. If an apparent goal was scored by Team A and is subsequently confirmed as a goal by Video Review, any goal scored by Team B during the period of time between the apparent goal by Team A and the stoppag e of play (Team B’s goal), the Team B goal will not be awarded. If the apparent goal by Team A is deemed to have entered the goal illegally (e.g., a “distinct kicking motion”), the goal will be disallowed. No goal will be awarded to Team B either in this circumstance since the play should have been stopped at the time of the apparent goal. The clock (including penalty time clocks, if applicable) shall be reset to the time of Team A’s apparent goal – whether awarded or disallowed.

Any penalties signaled during the period of time between the apparent goal and the next stoppage of play shall be assessed in the normal manner, except when a Minor Penalty is to be assessed to the Team scored upon and is therefore nullified by the scoring of the goal.
→ Rule 16 – Minor Penalties; → Rule 18.2 – Short-Handed

If an infraction happens after the first stoppage of play following an apparent goal (infraction after the whistle) by either Team, it is assessed and served in the normal manner regardless as to the decision rendered by Video Review.

When the Referee indicates there is a Video Review in progress, all Players (with the exception of the Goalkeepers) should proceed to their respective Players’ Bench immediately, and failure to do so may result in a Game Misconduct Penalty for offending Player(s) and shall be reported to the Proper Authorities.

Any potential goal requiring Video Review must be reviewed prior to and/or during the next stoppage of play. No goal may be awarded (or disallowed) as a result of a Video Review once the play has resumed.

In DEL Play offs games, the Video Review Consultant will connect directly with the Referee(s) at ice level to assist with the review of any close play or disputed goal. The On-ice Officials (Referees or Linespersons) decision shall be final.

The following situations are subject to Video Review:

1. Puck crossing the Goal Line
2. Puck in the net prior to the goal frame being dislodged or if the criteria’s for allowing a goal after a dislodged net is met.
3. Puck in the net prior to (or after) the expiration of time at the end of a period
4. With the use of a foot/skate, a “distinct kicking motion” was evident
5. Puck deliberately directed, batted, or thrown into the net by an attacking Player by any means (and with any part of their body) other than with their stick – excl. foot/skate – see (IV) above.
6. Puck deflected directly into the net of an On-ice Official
7. Puck struck or deflected into the net with a high-stick, above the height of the crossbar
8. Puck entering the net in a proper manner through goal mouth (ensuring puck did not enter net improperly through net meshing or underneath the net frame, etc.)
9. Puck entering the net as the culmination of a continuous play where the result of the play was unaffected by any whistle blown by the Referee upon their losing sight of the puck; and
10. The legitimacy of all potential goals on “Penalty Shot” or “Penalty Shot” Shootout attempts to ensure compliance with applicable rules (e.g., Goalkeeper leaving crease prior to puck touch at Center ice, Goalkeeper throwing stick, Goalkeeper dislodging goal, shooter cradling puck above the normal height of the shoulders, shooter performing illegal “spin-o-rama” move, Skater’s continued forward advancement of puck, “double-tap”/ “rebound”, etc.)
11. Scoring plays involving potential “Interference on the Goalkeeper”. → Rule 69 – Interference on the Goalkeeper
12. Missed Game Stoppage Event in the Attacking Zone Leading to a Goal A play that leads directly and immediately to the scoring of a goal on the ice and should have been stopped by reason of any play occurring in the Attacking Zone that should have resulted in a play stoppage caused by the attacking Team but did not.

Plays that involve a puck entering the net as a direct result of a “distinct kicking motion” shall be ruled “no goal”. A “distinct kicking motion,” for purposes of Video Review, is one where the video makes clear that an attacking Player has deliberately propelled the puck with a kick of their foot or skate and the puck subsequently enters the net. A goal cannot be scored on a play where an attacking Player propels the puck with their skate into the net (even by means of a subsequent deflection off another Player, unless from a stick of a skater) using a “distinct kicking motion”.

A goal also cannot be scored on a play where an attacking Player kicks any equipment (stick, glove, helmet, etc.) at the puck, including kicking the blade of their own stick, causing the puck to cross the Goal Line.

A puck that deflects into the net off an attacking Player’s skate who does not use a “distinct kicking motion” shall be ruled a “good goal”.

A puck that is directed into the net by an attacking Players’ skate shall also be ruled a “good goal”, as long as no “distinct kicking motion” is evident.
→ Rule 49.2 – Goals

The determining factor for high stick Video Review is where the puck makes contact with the stick in relation to the crossbar. If the puck makes contact with a portion of the stick that is at or below the level of the crossbar (despite some other portion of the stick being above the crossbar) and enters the goal, the goal shall be allowed.
→ Rule 80.3 – Disallowed Goal

Video Review may be used to establish the correct time on the clock.

Any loss of time on the game or penalty clocks due to a false “face-off”, a “face-off” violation or a puck going out of play must be replaced.
→ Rule 76.8 – Face-Off Procedure - Verification of Time, → Rule 85.7 – Verification of Time

In the event of any dispute regarding time, the Referees decision shall be final. The Game Timekeeper shall assist to verify game time via an additional timing device (DEL-approved stopwatch). In the event a Video Review shows that a goal was scored prior to the play being stopped, the Referees will inform the Game Timekeeper and Official Scorekeeper of the time of the goal and the amount of playing time left to be re-set on the Game Clock and penalty time clocks (if applicable).
→ Rule 34.7 – Verification of Time

...

The standard for overturning the call in the event of a “goal” call on the ice is that the On-ice Officials (Referees), after reviewing any and all available replays determine that the play which directly and immediately leads to a goal should have been stopped but was not at some point after the puck entered the Attacking Zone but prior to the goal being scored; where this standard is met, the goal will be disallowed. Potential infractions that would require a play stoppage in the Attacking Zone include but may not be limited to: Rule 79 – Hand Pass; Rule 80 – High-Sticking the Puck; and Rule 85 – Puck Out of Bounds.
Such infractions will only serve as a basis for overturning a “goal” call on the ice if Video Review can conclusively establish that a game stoppage event had occurred in the Attacking Zone and was missed by the On-ice Official(s).

Where the infraction at issue was a missed penalty call subject to the judgment or discretion of the On-ice Official(s), such infraction cannot result in the “goal” call on the ice being overturned, even if upon review, the On-ice Official(s) would have made a different call. Goals will only be reviewed for a potential “Missed Game Stoppage Event in the Attacking Zone” if the puck does not come out of the Attacking Zone again between the time of the “Missed Game Stoppage Event in the Attacking Zone” and the time the goal is scored.

The standard for overturning the call in the event of a “goal” call on the ice is that the On-ice Officials (Referees), after reviewing any and all replays and consulting with the Video Review Operations, determine that the goal should have been disallowed due to “Interference on the Goalkeeper,” as described in Rule 69 – Interference on the Goalkeeper; where this standard is met, the goal will be disallowed.

The standard for overturning the call in the event of a “no goal” call on the ice is that the On-ice Officials (Referees), after reviewing any and all replays, determine that the goal on the ice should have been allowed because either:

1. There was no actual contact of any kind initiated by the attacking Player with the Goalkeeper; or
2. The attacking Player was pushed, shoved or fouled by the defending Player causing the attacking Player to come into contact with the Goalkeeper; or
3. The attacking Player’s positioning within the Goal Crease did not impair the Goalkeeper’s ability to defend their goal and, in fact, had no discernable impact on the play; where this standard is met, the goal will be allowed.