Jump to content
The Official Site of the Montréal Canadiens
Canadiens de Montreal

2007-08 Officiating


tmash

Recommended Posts

You may have a point JL... but is it really only up to the players? The refs seem to have a part to play and perhaps in some ways the coach (if the players are told to sit back in a defensive shell for instance, which could lead to further penalties IMO... not saying that is the case, but it has to be considered)

The refs are not biased against us. For every call that hurts us, we have one in our favour, this is just an excuse.

As for the blame between players and coach though, this is a tougher question. Did we just draft players who take penalties? Are we developing them wrong? Are we too small, slow, etc. and need to cheat? Is it the system we're playing? Is the coach not teaching them right?

I really have no idea, but it is something we really need to fix.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The refs are not biased against us. For every call that hurts us, we have one in our favour, this is just an excuse.

As for the blame between players and coach though, this is a tougher question. Did we just draft players who take penalties? Are we developing them wrong? Are we too small, slow, etc. and need to cheat? Is it the system we're playing? Is the coach not teaching them right?

I really have no idea, but it is something we really need to fix.

all of the above :D I think it's partly a mental conditioning. A player gets frustrated and instead of moving his legs faster he does what comes natural, he reaches out and tries to slow his opponent down. Hence we get nailed for hooking and holding BUT there are the cases where the call is borderline at best but the ref makes it anyway. A prime example IMO is the holding call on Streit against the Canes. From the back end you see Streit's hand go out and the Canes player go down but on the reverse angle he never touched the guy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The refs are not biased against us. For every call that hurts us, we have one in our favour, this is just an excuse.

As for the blame between players and coach though, this is a tougher question. Did we just draft players who take penalties? Are we developing them wrong? Are we too small, slow, etc. and need to cheat? Is it the system we're playing? Is the coach not teaching them right?

I really have no idea, but it is something we really need to fix.

Well I'm sorry but I think sometimes they are and in any case they do play a part in a game and can change the flow (they're not angels and do get a lot of things wrong IMO). They call the strangest penalties relating to interference and then let other things more violent and flagrant go (like creaming our guys without the puck in front of the opposition's net). This favors the more physical teams IMO.

They are the Habs... 24 Stanley's (too much in some peoples eyes who think we've had our fair share).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well I'm sorry but I think sometimes they are and in any case they do play a part in a game and can change the flow

They do, but they also can change the flow in our favour. Reffing isn't a science and there are always going to be missed calls and bad/borderline calls. It's just we are likely to ignore the ones in our favour and continously point out the ones that are against us. The refs aren't being biased, they just aren't perfect and as a Habs fan it probably looks like they are biased against you (I bet the fans of 29 other teams say the refs are biassed against them). Bad reffing may explain extra penalties in one game, but the fact that game after game (I'm thinking back to last season) we spend so much time in the box, isn't just thanks to reffing.

They call the strangest penalties relating to interference and then let other things more violent and flagrant go (like creaming our guys without the puck in front of the opposition's net).

But that's moreso what the NHL has mandated them to do, and it's the same for all 30 teams. They have been told basically that interference is the #1 thing to crack down on. It's simple, don't hook the guy, yet players constantly do it anyways, and then get mad when the refs call them on it. Basically every penalty I saw against the Leafs was called correctly. And even in spite of Carbonneau's Pat Quinn impression out there, the refs have been doing a decent job.

This favors the more physical teams IMO.

That could be. But this is the way the NHL wants the game played, not the individual refs. If this is the case, then an excuse for so many penalties may be that we are too small, not the reffing itself.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They do, but they also can change the flow in our favour. Reffing isn't a science and there are always going to be missed calls and bad/borderline calls. It's just we are likely to ignore the ones in our favour and continously point out the ones that are against us. The refs aren't being biased, they just aren't perfect and as a Habs fan it probably looks like they are biased against you (I bet the fans of 29 other teams say the refs are biassed against them). Bad reffing may explain extra penalties in one game, but the fact that game after game (I'm thinking back to last season) we spend so much time in the box, isn't just thanks to reffing.

But that's moreso what the NHL has mandated them to do, and it's the same for all 30 teams. They have been told basically that interference is the #1 thing to crack down on. It's simple, don't hook the guy, yet players constantly do it anyways, and then get mad when the refs call them on it. Basically every penalty I saw against the Leafs was called correctly. And even in spite of Carbonneau's Pat Quinn impression out there, the refs have been doing a decent job.

That could be. But this is the way the NHL wants the game played, not the individual refs. If this is the case, then an excuse for so many penalties may be that we are too small, not the reffing itself.

Bull-crap... The Habs are a marked team the same way a player can be marked :lol:

Listen I am a Habs fan, yes, but I am also a Hockey fan and I believe a very objective person... I watch tons of games (not just the Habs) and certain teams always seem to get the short end of the stick.

You may be right about one thing though... they do what they are told (the refs) and it is that bias that favors teams that are more physical and get away with things much more flagrant as I said already.

And as far as individual refs are concerned... I wonder really where they get them from... bush league at best.

The Habs have to learn to play to the refs mindset... as of now Carbo has seemed to have toned down his reaction and the players are keeping an even keel. This has to continue in spite of the officiating.

The team has been good on the PK thank heavens... or it could have been worse (it wasn't really that bad yet... but?)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest habinto
Bull-crap... The Habs are a marked team the same way a player can be marked :lol:

Listen I am a Habs fan, yes, but I am also a Hockey fan and I believe a very objective person... I watch tons of games (not just the Habs) and certain teams always seem to get the short end of the stick.

You may be right about one thing though... they do what they are told (the refs) and it is that bias that favors teams that are more physical and get away with things much more flagrant as I said already.

And as far as individual refs are concerned... I wonder really where they get them from... bush league at best.

The Habs have to learn to play to the refs mindset... as of now Carbo has seemed to have toned down his reaction and the players are keeping an even keel. This has to continue in spite of the officiating.

The team has been good on the PK thank heavens... or it could have been worse (it wasn't really that bad yet... but?)

So you think that there is a big conspiracy thing going on. The league is out to get the Habs?

I agree with Graham. As much as I do not like Bettman I believe the league has integrity and try to act in a fair way. NHL Refs are not perfect but they are the best of the best. The league and or the player association can't tell the refs to be bias.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So you think that there is a big conspiracy thing going on. The league is out to get the Habs?

I agree with Graham. As much as I do not like Bettman I believe the league has integrity and try to act in a fair way. NHL Refs are not perfect but they are the best of the best. The league and or the player association can't tell the refs to be bias.

What does what I had to say have to do with a conspiracy theory? I just stated the facts the way the league is run. The Habs just happen to fall into that group of teams that are not as physical and get shafted when other teams that are get away with flagrant infractions.

These type of teams, like the Habs, get caught doing the only thing just about that the league wants called... if they were bigger and would/could play more physical they probably wouldn't have to do what they do just to keep in the game and get caught as much. This is why the Habs as others are at a disadvantage.

Granted the Habs players and staff have to try to be smarter... as I said basically, and play to the mindset of the officiating.

And Colin Campbell can tell the Refs what they want called and what not to worry about to much (let go)... its obvious.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And as far as individual refs are concerned... I wonder really where they get them from... bush league at best.

I hope you meant that semi-humourously, but seriously that is just insulting.

NHL refs are the best of the best (with a few exceptions), and most do an incredible job. It's easy for us armchair refs watching a camera pointed at the puck to point out every missed call or after multiple angle video replays say what should have happened. But the refs can't see everything, they only have repeat in very specific situations, and in any sport they make mistakes.

The refs may be skating beside a guy making 100x as much money as him, he has the league complaining that it wants to cut down on obstruction, yet has the coaches complaining about the number of powerplays and the fans complaining that "that was barely a hook". They get mixed messages from the league, they have to enforce things that a fan thinks "that isn't a penalty", and overall I think it is probably one of the toughest jobs in sports.

What does what I had to say have to do with a conspiracy theory? I just stated the facts the way the league is run. The Habs just happen to fall into that group of teams that are not as physical and get shafted when other teams that are get away with flagrant infractions.

These type of teams, like the Habs, get caught doing the only thing just about that the league wants called... if they were bigger and would/could play more physical they probably wouldn't have to do what they do just to keep in the game and get caught as much. This is why the Habs as others are at a disadvantage.

And that could be, but if that's the case, the problem would be "we are too small", not the reffing itself. The refs just enforce the rules of the league. It wouldn't make much sense in a discussion "why do we have trouble scoring" to blame the refs because "when a puck hits the crossbar they don't count it as a goal" - the refs just enforce the rules. If the Habs are built in a way that works against us from the NHL's rules, that isn't the fault of reffing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I hope you meant that semi-humourously, but seriously that is just insulting.

NHL refs are the best of the best (with a few exceptions), and most do an incredible job. It's easy for us armchair refs watching a camera pointed at the puck to point out every missed call or after multiple angle video replays say what should have happened. But the refs can't see everything, they only have repeat in very specific situations, and in any sport they make mistakes.

The refs may be skating beside a guy making 100x as much money as him, he has the league complaining that it wants to cut down on obstruction, yet has the coaches complaining about the number of powerplays and the fans complaining that "that was barely a hook". They get mixed messages from the league, they have to enforce things that a fan thinks "that isn't a penalty", and overall I think it is probably one of the toughest jobs in sports.

And that could be, but if that's the case, the problem would be "we are too small", not the reffing itself. The refs just enforce the rules of the league. It wouldn't make much sense in a discussion "why do we have trouble scoring" to blame the refs because "when a puck hits the crossbar they don't count it as a goal" - the refs just enforce the rules. If the Habs are built in a way that works against us from the NHL's rules, that isn't the fault of reffing.

If the refs were the 'best of the best' they would call the flagrant infractions... and there are many new young refs trying to make a name for themselves while more senior ones call the game differently. Its this inconsistency that probably irks Carbo (and other coaches) to no end. I feel for the players... it must be hard to know just what they are allowed to do from one game to another.

Two refs... and they still can't see a high-stick by Sundin on Komi... and don't forget Koivu's eye... The refs are probably just as confused... calling imaginary infractions an allowing obvious ones go.

Watch the game closely tonight with an eye on what they let go and what they call.

In any event... the state of the Habs in this respect (penalties), hopefully, will improve and they'll get more of the breaks when and if it does. They have no choice... they have no power in this. Love it or hate it its Hockey the way the league wants it I guess. I still love it, but am not afraid to call a spade a spade for the Habs or other teams when it comes to officiating.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If the refs were the 'best of the best' they would call the flagrant infractions... and there are many new young refs trying to make a name for themselves while more senior ones call the game differently. Its this inconsistency that probably irks Carbo (and other coaches) to no end. I feel for the players... it must be hard to know just what they are allowed to do from one game to another.

Two refs... and they still can't see a high-stick by Sundin on Komi... and don't forget Koivu's eye... The refs are probably just as confused... calling imaginary infractions an allowing obvious ones go.

Of course they make mistakes, they can't see everything. Yes they miss calls and it hurts us, but they also miss calls that help us, yet I don't see us complaining about those?

And a lot of what looks like "letting flagrant infractions go", is really just how the NHL tells them to ref the game. For example, hooking results in a penalty, while many headshots are perfectly legal. I don't like this, but it's not the refs fault.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Of course they make mistakes, they can't see everything. Yes they miss calls and it hurts us, but they also miss calls that help us, yet I don't see us complaining about those?

And a lot of what looks like "letting flagrant infractions go", is really just how the NHL tells them to ref the game. For example, hooking results in a penalty, while many headshots are perfectly legal. I don't like this, but it's not the refs fault.

You mean like the one Roberts gave to Kostitsyn tonight... two refs missed that? Hope Kos is alright (seems he lost some teeth and didn't play much after that).

BTW there was inconsistency tonight as many hooking/intereference calls were let go for both teams... go figure... must be because it was the Glory Boys of Pittsburgh Playing and they didn't want the spectacle ruined by an over-exhuberant abundance of flaky calls. Compare this game with the one against the Leafs or even the first game against the Canes...

The Habs need to look towards the future with Price... the guy was outstanding in his first game. That is one thing the Habs have going for them. Kovy still playing good, Koivu too... and the boys we're all counting on like Higgins, Ryder, Plekanec are looking promising. I'd say in spite of the league the team is going in the right direction... it the league cooperates and starts to call the game by the book our Habs will be something to be reckoned with very soon.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A few things about the ref issue:

  1. While I don't believe there is a conspiracy against us, we get high-sticked ALL the time without calls being made. Why? I don't know. But I am really starting to notice that we are far more likely to have one of our players get blatantly high-sticked without a penalty.
  2. Certain referees really do have it in for us. Kerry Fraser being a prime example.
  3. No matter how good the bulk of the referees are, there are certainly bad refs, and bad calls being made all the time. Are refs human? Sure they are. Is there room for improvement? Yes, absolutely. I would like to see a challenge system implemented similar to what exists in football, so that teams have some way of rectifying the situation when there is a blown call.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

A few things about the ref issue:
  1. While I don't believe there is a conspiracy against us, we get high-sticked ALL the time without calls being made. Why? I don't know. But I am really starting to notice that we are far more likely to have one of our players get blatantly high-sticked without a penalty.
  2. Certain referees really do have it in for us. Kerry Fraser being a prime example.
  3. No matter how good the bulk of the referees are, there are certainly bad refs, and bad calls being made all the time. Are refs human? Sure they are. Is there room for improvement? Yes, absolutely. I would like to see a challenge system implemented similar to what exists in football, so that teams have some way of rectifying the situation when there is a blown call.
I'd vote for that, we should start a petition and send it to Campbell. Excellent idea... but would Bettwoman allow it? Seems to me one of the reasons behind the shootout and that rediculous delay of game penalty was to shorten times for games. I would add a de-merit system for on-ice officials at the same time.

The Habs size up front could be one reason we get Highsticked... but the fact that it goes unoticed by the refs is pure donkey dung.

So the state of the Habs is that they are a tad too small (an understatement?) and we do have greater size waiting in Hamilton... hmm

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A few things about the ref issue:

While I don't believe there is a conspiracy against us, we get high-sticked ALL the time without calls being made. Why? I don't know. But I am really starting to notice that we are far more likely to have one of our players get blatantly high-sticked without a penalty.

You're right it does look bad, although I think it is little more than a coincidence that it seems to happen against us to much

[*] Certain referees really do have it in for us. Kerry Fraser being a prime example.

No, Fraser just makes bizarre calls. I can actually remember last season one of his bizarre calls worked in our favour. It's just we'll all remember the "Therrien 2 minutes for throwing his arms in the air" penalty. Most teams probably think Fraser is biased against them, because some of his calls just have no other logical explanation.

I would like to see a challenge system implemented similar to what exists in football, so that teams have some way of rectifying the situation when there is a blown call.

I can't see it working in hockey, because it isn't a start-stop game like football. Any questionable goal is reviewed anyways, but for reviewing things like penalties, you really run into problems because a penalty means more than just 2 minutes, it stops the play, the goalie can leave his net, and overall it really affects the game. While the idea is nice in theory, I can't see video review being good for anything more than whether the puck crossed the line or not in hockey.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You're right it does look bad, although I think it is little more than a coincidence that it seems to happen against us to much

No, Fraser just makes bizarre calls. I can actually remember last season one of his bizarre calls worked in our favour. It's just we'll all remember the "Therrien 2 minutes for throwing his arms in the air" penalty. Most teams probably think Fraser is biased against them, because some of his calls just have no other logical explanation.

I can't see it working in hockey, because it isn't a start-stop game like football. Any questionable goal is reviewed anyways, but for reviewing things like penalties, you really run into problems because a penalty means more than just 2 minutes, it stops the play, the goalie can leave his net, and overall it really affects the game. While the idea is nice in theory, I can't see video review being good for anything more than whether the puck crossed the line or not in hockey.

I disagree... this is your opinion and I'll accept that, but Weep brings up something that could turn the game around and into something better in terms of officiating. It could be limited to one or two calls a game and the coach challenging could get a bench minor if the judgement goes against him... coaches will be very careful about when they want to use it.

I still believe that somehow the officials on the ice have to be held accountable for blatant errors or imaginary calls. They can't use the excuse that they didn't see a penalty only to invent ones they really didn't see and are just gut-reactions.

If BG is on the competition committee I hope somehow these discussion get to him... the state of the Habs is tied to the way the league is officiated and needs to change IMO.

This whole thing with interference and hooking is ill-conceived f it was meant to open the game up and lead to more scoring. Five minute majors for flagrant fouls would do a lot more IMO and key players would have more room to manouver without worrying as much about cheap shots and violent attacks.. Butt-backwards is what I would call-it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest overlords

I think that coaches should be able to pursue bad calls outside of games so that refs would have to pay fines if found to have made a reallllllly stupid call. Whats the point in even paying these people if they miss some of the simplest things. When hockey players don't do their job or don't do it well enough. They pay for it in taking penalties or demotions etc. Refs have nothing to worry about, so why not let them run the league..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Miltie01

I have heard quite a few ex players say that if you were on the road against Toronto or the Rangers you just accepted the fact you were not going to" get the calls". Is this a conspiracy, or favoritism..I don't know but I have heard it mentioned.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think that coaches should be able to pursue bad calls outside of games so that refs would have to pay fines if found to have made a reallllllly stupid call. Whats the point in even paying these people if they miss some of the simplest things. When hockey players don't do their job or don't do it well enough. They pay for it in taking penalties or demotions etc. Refs have nothing to worry about, so why not let them run the league..

The refs can be fired if they aren't doing there jobs. We can't fine them for missing calls, they're only human and are going to miss some things. These guys have the most thankless job in the whole league.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I disagree... this is your opinion and I'll accept that, but Weep brings up something that could turn the game around and into something better in terms of officiating. It could be limited to one or two calls a game and the coach challenging could get a bench minor if the judgement goes against him... coaches will be very careful about when they want to use it.

It's a nice idea in theory, but really wouldn't work in practice.

What sort of "calls" are you talking about? Any questionable goal is already reviewed. Anything else just makes no sense when you think about it.

- Missed Penalties: can the coach just stop play when there is a penalty. If we wait until the next break this really throws everything off in terms of the flow and pace of the game (being in the box for the last 2 minutes of a game for a penalty taken 14:00 into the third doesn't make sense

- Bad penalties: This one could sort of work, although I think we'd just be wasting everyone's time 95% of the time, since there are very few truly "wrong" penalties. Some are questionable, but to overturn you need complete evidence against. So unless it was a hook where you can prove his stick never touched the guy, this situation would rarely be of any use

- Early whistles: This would just be downright horrible to allow to be reviewed. Now, ocne the whistle blows, no matter what the reason, you stop play. If it possible that goals that go in after a bad whistle count, players could theoretically just keep playing forever after the whistle goes "just in case"

Are there any other situations you can think of?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

just some comments about some of the general things said in this thread...

NHL on-ice officials, as a group, are the best sports officials in the world... it's not even close!...

football officials are part-timers, I always find it amusing when commentators fill time by giving bio details of the officials and tell us their 'real' jobs... and they make so many errors that they have instant replay now...

baseball umps are far from being in good physical shape -- though they are in better shape now since MLB got tired of having them drop dead on the field... their on-field duties are limited compared to hockey referees -- ball or strike, fair or foul, safe or out, that's generally pretty much it, just choose from two things... umps are notorious for becoming 'part' of the game, deliberately baiting players and managers so they can eject them and as a result have an impact on the result of the game themselves...

basketball refs suffer from the same confrontational attitude as the umps... every criticism about how NHL officials call games can be applied to NBA officials and to a greater extent even though their jobs are easier -- three officials to watch fewer players on a smaller playing surface... then there are the criminals, not just Tim Donaghy, but the tax evaders...

the NHL's officials are the 'best of the best' as Graeme stated... they've paid their dues like the players to get to the top of their profession and to claim they're not dedicated professionals is ridiculous and frankly offensive...

the comments about how officials can make bad calls or miss calls and nothing happens to them are uninformed and shows that the official's job is not understood by most people... EVERY game is evaulated by a supervisor, either in person or via videotape... officials are then sent evaulations and receive a written Mid Season Rating... not sure if all officials get to work the first round of the playoffs, but they certainly do not all get to work later rounds... those assignments are made based on performance... and officials meet with a series supervisor after every game of the playoffs... and the reason you see new officials every year? it's because some guys get FIRED, their contracts aren't renewed because of their job performance... so yes, there are some bad officials and they lose their NHL jobs...

as far as their performance, it's easy to nit-pick calls when you have the benefit of countless replays and ideal camera angles... there's a reason the 'master shot' of hockey telecasts come from cameras located 10 rows up in the stands, it's much easier to see the action from those positions... but the refs are at ice level where things are happening seemingly faster... so yes, things will be missed... but you can't fine them for an unavoidable error -- if they don't see something, that's hardly their fault... if they make errors they shouldn't have, e.g. misapplying the rules, or missing a play because they were out of position for no good reason, they may very well be subject to discipline from the league but that's an internal matter which the public will never hear about -- just as it should be and must be if the official is to do his job... if it's known that a referee has been disciplined for his poor performance, it just makes doing the job that much harder...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's a nice idea in theory, but really wouldn't work in practice.

What sort of "calls" are you talking about? Any questionable goal is already reviewed. Anything else just makes no sense when you think about it.

- Missed Penalties: can the coach just stop play when there is a penalty. If we wait until the next break this really throws everything off in terms of the flow and pace of the game (being in the box for the last 2 minutes of a game for a penalty taken 14:00 into the third doesn't make sense

- Bad penalties: This one could sort of work, although I think we'd just be wasting everyone's time 95% of the time, since there are very few truly "wrong" penalties. Some are questionable, but to overturn you need complete evidence against. So unless it was a hook where you can prove his stick never touched the guy, this situation would rarely be of any use

- Early whistles: This would just be downright horrible to allow to be reviewed. Now, ocne the whistle blows, no matter what the reason, you stop play. If it possible that goals that go in after a bad whistle count, players could theoretically just keep playing forever after the whistle goes "just in case"

Are there any other situations you can think of?

I'm not talking about missed hooking calls, there are already too many of them to begin with (and many marginal but what the heck)... I'm talking about missed calls when a flagrant infraction goes unpenalized... most times there is a stoppage in play at these times (like when Kostitsyn was hit by Roberts... or Koivu highsticked by Williams). Another way this could be used is when a player is penalized for contact with the goalie and is pushed in by a defender (like when Higgins was penalized recently). I think it would be important for a review to take place immediately on calls where deliberate intent to injure is in question. This, so that a ref couldn't assess a minor penalty because he didn't see things clearly enough or chose not to penalize a player the way he could under the rules. A coach challenging the officials at these times would make a lot of sense IMO.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not talking about missed hooking calls, there are already too many of them to begin with (and many marginal but what the heck)... I'm talking about missed calls when a flagrant infraction goes unpenalized... most times there is a stoppage in play at these times (like when Kostitsyn was hit by Roberts... or Koivu highsticked by Williams). Another way this could be used is when a player is penalized for contact with the goalie and is pushed in by a defender (like when Higgins was penalized recently). I think it would be important for a review to take place immediately on calls where deliberate intent to injure is in question. This, so that a ref couldn't assess a minor penalty because he didn't see things clearly enough or chose not to penalize a player the way he could under the rules. A coach challenging the officials at these times would make a lot of sense IMO.

Those situations could work decent I suppose, although I still think you're opening up a whole can of worms by allowing things like penalties to be reviewed. Also it's up to interpretations what "flagrant infraction" means. You obviously mean it as attempt to injure or obvious high stick, but others may think an obvious hook (which Montreal probably gets away with more than other teams just due to the number of times they do it) is a "flagrant infraction". Each GM would want things reviewable that would help their team. A team like Montreal who doesn't high stick or attempt to injure much, but who hooks and cheats in that sense all the time is going to want "fragrant infractions" to mean something different than a team like Anaheim or Philli.

Plus, I can't see it ever happening, would just slow the game down too much and there is no way you could make rules to make it truly fair (you need some sort of deterrent to stop coaches from using it all the time - but any deterrent will have side effects). Basically the way penalties work now is "law of averages". Sure sometimes things go unpenalized, but this happens to both teams, so it evens out. Teams who play cheap and break the rules aren't going to get everything called, but they should get more called than a team that plays clean.

Now it may work in playoffs because one call can be so critical, but even then there may be problems. And a lot of things that truly screw up the games aren't reviewable. Like that call last season where the ref blew a whistle (which was a mistake) and the puck went in. Everything was saying "that should be a goal" and "why didn't they go to video review". Really, the only thing that could be reviewed was if the puck crossed the line before the whistle (which it clearly didn't) and not the whistle itself. Once the whistle goes, no matter what the reason, play is dead. There was nothing to review.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Those situations could work decent I suppose, although I still think you're opening up a whole can of worms by allowing things like penalties to be reviewed. Also it's up to interpretations what "flagrant infraction" means. You obviously mean it as attempt to injure or obvious high stick, but others may think an obvious hook (which Montreal probably gets away with more than other teams just due to the number of times they do it) is a "flagrant infraction". Each GM would want things reviewable that would help their team. A team like Montreal who doesn't high stick or attempt to injure much, but who hooks and cheats in that sense all the time is going to want "fragrant infractions" to mean something different than a team like Anaheim or Philli.

Plus, I can't see it ever happening, would just slow the game down too much and there is no way you could make rules to make it truly fair (you need some sort of deterrent to stop coaches from using it all the time - but any deterrent will have side effects). Basically the way penalties work now is "law of averages". Sure sometimes things go unpenalized, but this happens to both teams, so it evens out. Teams who play cheap and break the rules aren't going to get everything called, but they should get more called than a team that plays clean.

Now it may work in playoffs because one call can be so critical, but even then there may be problems. And a lot of things that truly screw up the games aren't reviewable. Like that call last season where the ref blew a whistle (which was a mistake) and the puck went in. Everything was saying "that should be a goal" and "why didn't they go to video review". Really, the only thing that could be reviewed was if the puck crossed the line before the whistle (which it clearly didn't) and not the whistle itself. Once the whistle goes, no matter what the reason, play is dead. There was nothing to review.

I'm beginning to wonder if you are/were a ref... whatever. I think we have both raised a number of interesting points... as far as the law of averages... I believe that only works for some teams favor while others are on the bad side of the equilibrium and that's how you get an average in this game.

Another game tonight and again inconsistency... as far as both teams were concerned from game to game and within the game itself from period to period... more phantom calls (I thought the ref was supposed to see the infraction) and missed flagrant calls (another high-stick... at a critical time too... at center ice no less and again I thought the ref was supposed to see the infraction)... but hey they're the 'best of the best' (not in my books... they are far from professional IMO). I don't get it anymore... butt-backwards is all I can think of... frustrating :(

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Very few as compared to not in our favor IMO... I watch well over 100 games (including every Hab game) and the refs were not just bad tonight... they're bad most nights (even when the Habs aren't playing). I laugh when there are still fans out there who can't see that the officiating in this "professional" league is atrocious... blind faith?

Yes the team could've played better at times, but the breaks including the refs calls didn't go the Habs way... again.

I'm not going to defend the refs, because I do think they could be better FOR ALL TEAMS. But I will say it's about a million time easier to call the game with the aid of slow motion replays and 10 different camera angles than it is to call live with players skating at break neck speeds with shots over 100 mph. It's easy to second guess the officials, but face it guys, it's a VERY FAST GAME, and very hard to call and make split second decissions. Like it or not, the NHL officials are the best in the world.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not going to defend the refs, because I do think they could be better FOR ALL TEAMS. But I will say it's about a million time easier to call the game with the aid of slow motion replays and 10 different camera angles than it is to call live with players skating at break neck speeds with shots over 100 mph. It's easy to second guess the officials, but face it guys, it's a VERY FAST GAME, and very hard to call and make split second decissions. Like it or not, the NHL officials are the best in the world.
Being that it is a hard game to call, then I would think that a ref shouldn't guess at making a call (like with the call on Higgins)... if you can't be 100% sure then it shouldn't be called period. And the refs were much better when there were fewer teams which translates into fewer refs, which translates into less inconsistency, which translates into less confusion on the part of the players.

Many young people here may not remeber when there were only 6 teams... I do... and then the NHL did probably have the best refs... oh and there was only one on the ice with only two eyes not two with four (that couldn't see the highstick on Lats at center ice yet imagined one on Kostopoulos behind the net). Officiating has lost all sense of what the game's rules are and how they need to be applied IMO. Rank amateur refs at best... poor stewardship of the responsibility from above... it hurts the game, bigtime... when will they learn they are the cause of the biggest problems with this game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...