All players must go to their benches during the review.

A team does not have the authority to request a video review (VGR) of a play.

If the puck enters the net and play was to continue, then the review would take place during the first stoppage of play following the incident. If no review is performed during this first stoppage of play, then no review of the play will be permitted at a later time.

A video review of the play may be called even though the first stoppage of play signals the end of a period or the end of a game.

ICE Hockey League Team Official Request for a VGR Decision (Coaches Challenge)

The video review process, triggered by the Coach’s Challenge, can only be utilized in a GOAL situation, and is intended to be extremely narrow in scope. The original call on the ice will be overturned, if and only if, a conclusive and irrefutable determination can be made on the basis of video evidence that the original call on the ice was clearly not correct.

Three (3) possible outcomes:

1. Call on ice stands or;
2. Call on ice is overturned or;
3. Video review is inconclusive

Challenge #1 (First):
If a team initiates a Coach’s Challenge, and such Challenge does not result in the original call on the ice being overturned, they lose their ability to challenge plays without penalty if they are not overturned or inconclusive.

Challenge #2 (Second):
If a team that has already initiated a Challenge that was unsuccessful, initiates a Coach’s Challenge for any of the of the listed scenarios and such Challenge does not result in the original call being overturned the team exercising such a Challenge shall be assessed a minor penalty for delaying the game

Further Challenges (3+):
If a team that has already initiated two or more Challenges that were unsuccessful, initiates a Coach’s Challenge for any of the listed scenarios and such Challenge does not result in the original call on the ice being overturned, the team exercising such Challenge shall be assessed a double – minor penalty for delaying the game

Video reviews that are deemed INCONCLUSIVE will not result in the team being assessed a bench minor penalty and the original call on the ice stands.

VGR Coaches Challenge - Each team is permitted a VGR Coaches Challenge, under the following criteria:

• A team may only request a Coach’s Challenge to review 1 of the 11 VGR criteria or an off-side situation or a “Missed Game Stoppage” that led to a goal. The head coach must notify the on-ice officials specifically with which 1 of the criteria is to be challenged.
• The official scorekeeper shall record on the game sheet the time and the result of all Coach’s Challenges.

The referee will inform the opposing coach that an official VGR process is underway and what specifically is being reviewed.

Notify the PA announcer that team X has called for an official VGR, for the purpose of informing TV and the spectators, the cause for delay.

SITUATIONS SUBJECT TO COACH’S CHALLENGE:

A team my request a Coach’s Challenge to review the following scenario:

“Off-Side” – Play leading to a goal
A play that results in a “goal” call on the ice where the defending team claims that the play should have been stopped by reason of an “Off-Side” infraction by the attacking team.

Rule 83 – Off-Side
The video review process triggered by the Coach’s Challenge can only be utilized in a GOAL situation and is intended to be extremely narrow in scope. The original call on the ice will be overturned if, and only if, a conclusive and irrefutable determination can be made based on video evidence, that the original call on the ice was clearly not correct, the original call on the ice will be confirmed.

A Coach’s Challenge must be initiated by notice verbally communicated to a referee prior to the center ice face-off following the GOAL. Teams may not unduly delay the resumption of play while evaluating whether to initiate a Coach’s Challenge.

To expedite the review process, the Coach initiating a Coach’s Challenge is required to provide to the Referee the approximate time on the clock when the suggested infraction occurred.

There are only three possible outcomes for the Video Goal Judge on a Coach’s Challenge:

1. Disallowed goal, reset the time on the score clock to when the off-side would have occurred and face-off at the appropriate location
2. Allow the goal
3. Inconclusive video available for the game officials, therefore, goal is allowed

Once the Officials have indicated their decision following a coach’s challenge, no additional explanation is required at the players bench and the Officials are to immediately proceed with the appropriate line change procedure and face-off.

Rule 38.10. – Applicable Standards For “Missed Game Stoppage Event In The Attacking Zone” Challenge

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 and consulting with the IIHF Video Review Operations determine that the play 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:

• Hand Pass (Rule 79);
• High-Sticking the Puck (Rule 80);
• and Puck Out of Bounds (Rule 85).

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).

➔ RULES 79, 80 AND 85
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.

Examples
Teams are allowed to challenge, and we are allowed to initiate a review for “stoppages” that should have happened before a goal. High sticking the puck, glove pass, puck out of play are all reviewable after the scoring of a goal. Provided the foul happened in the attacking zone. The play will be reset, each time there is a whistle, or the puck clears the blue line.

• Attacking team high sticks the puck in the attacking zone and plays the puck in the attacking zone. This is reviewed and called a high stick because it was completed in the attacking zone. Therefore, we would have NO GOAL
• Attacking team high sticks the puck in the neutral zone, the attacking team plays the puck in the attacking zone. This is reviewed and called a high stick because it was completed in the attacking zone. Therefore, we have NO GOAL ON THE PLAY
• Attacking team high sticks puck in the neutral zone, the attacking team plays the puck in the neutral zone. This is reviewed and not called high sticking because the play was completed in the neutral zone. Therefore, we have GOAL ON THE PLAY
• Puck hits the netting in the attacking zone and is undetected by the officials on the ice. Play can be reviewed and if it is clear undisputable evidence, it hit the netting, we would have NO GOAL
• Attacking team high sticks the puck in the attacking zone, play continues, and the puck clears the zone (into the neutral zone) and play returns to the attacking zone and a goal is scored. This is not a reviewable play as the puck exited the defending zone into the neutral zone at which time the play was reset.

On all these plays, we need undisputed evidence to overturn the call on the ice.